[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 8 - Reconsideration - 1st reading conclusions

Alice Jansen alice.jansen at icann.org
Fri Jan 22 08:21:41 UTC 2016

Sent on behalf of CoChairs

1. The following concerns will be addressed in implementation:
¥ Concerns raised during comment:
i. There is a recommendation that this tool should not be regarded in isolation but rather as one among other mechanisms.
ii. • Concern was raised that the ombudsman is not sufficiently equipped and knowledgeable to do substantive evaluation. It is also suggested that an independent party, such as the Ombudsman, provide an initial assessment to the Board as to the merit of any and all Reconsideration Requests.
iii. • There is a call for Reconsideration Requests to be transparent and fully communicated to all ICANN stakeholders.

Second reading is planned for Thursday, 28 January.

Best regards

Mathieu, Thomas, León

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160122/b7e1799d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Rec 8 - Reconsideration - 1st reading conclusions.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 267095 bytes
Desc: Rec 8 - Reconsideration - 1st reading conclusions.pdf
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160122/b7e1799d/Rec8-Reconsideration-1streadingconclusions-0001.pdf>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list