[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 1 - Inspection rights - 2nd reading conclusions

Kavouss Arasteh kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Fri Jan 15 15:55:46 UTC 2016

Dear Alice,
Thank you for the revised Rec.1
Dear Co-Chairs,
It seems to me that we are about to finalize the REc.
I hope Board's Collaboration, in particular, Bruce ghard works would
continue on other Recs.
If such course of action continue and we finsish our works in Feb. I wish
to indicate that:
1. We need to publish the agreed changes but not as a SUPPLEMENT due to the
fact that the content has been changed/ modified/ amended.In that case
according to my long experience in the other entities ,we need to publish a
Revised version of 3rd Proposal .
2. the next question is should we put that revised version to public
comments or not?
3..While I am always in favour of consultation and broadening that
consultation but we should be mindful of the consequence as not to be faced
with a chais process having an open -ended one.
In the last ICG call, the issue of Supplement  / revised version of the
3rd  CCWG Proposal / Report  was briefly discussed and they are waiting for
CCWG decision on the matter.
Please kindly put the issue to the discussion at the next CCWG with some
reasonable  discussion time..Perhaps this e-mail will trigger some
discussion before the next meeting

2016-01-15 16:15 GMT+01:00 Alice Jansen <alice.jansen at icann.org>:

> *Sent on behalf of CoChairs *
> Please find below the main conclusions of our deliberations during call
> #77. The updated document is attached.
> 1. Scoping of Inspection rights (§19 and beyond) to address Board
> concerns, based on Board suggestion and lawyer memo (details on pages 5-6):
> a. Scope and limitations confirmed, stressing the difference between DIDP
> and Inspection Rights – Board confirmed agreement on new language
> b. Inspection rights for accounting books and records and minutes based on
> a one SO/AC threshold
> c. Introduce additional suggestion by Icann Board regarding Investigation
> right (audits), based on 3 SO/ACs threshold.
> d. Confirmed direction for implementation to avoid abusive claims
> e. Included Board comment edits (see below)
> 2. Discuss regarding GAC as Decisional Participant in the Community Powers
> differed awaiting final GAC input – see comment page 6
> Best regards
> Mathieu, Thomas, León
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160115/6f92b7b5/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list