[council] NCSG councillors' statements

Wed Mar 9 18:32:06 UTC 2016

Thanks, Marilia. For the record, we have received the statements from you, David Cake (supported by Julf) and the IPC by the deadline of 18.00 UTC. These will now be included in the letter transmitting the results to the CCWG-Accountabilty Chairs.

Best regards,

Marika

From: <owner-council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com<mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday 9 March 2016 at 17:53
To: "council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>" <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
Subject: [council] NCSG councillors' statements

Dear James, dear colleagues,

I would like to convey to you the statements that the NCSG councillors would like to see included in the records of today's approval of the CCWG Accountability proposal.

Thank you
Marília

These comments are submitted by the councillors identified under each of the recommendations to either clarify our understanding of the recommendations, or put some concerns associated with them on the record. They are not meant, in any way, to either renegotiate the substance of the recommendations, nor provide any instructions regarding their implementation. It is also important to be clear that the councillors identified with each of the comments have supported these recommendations, and have voted in favor of the GNSO adopting them as one of the chartering organizations from the ICANN names community.

Recommendation #2: Empowering the Community through Consensus: Engagement, Escalation, and Enforcement

Statement presented on behalf of Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin and Marília Maciel.

The aforementioned NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 2 with the understanding that bylaws will reflect the CCWG's requirement that the exercise of community powers should not require unanimity of participating AC/SOs, and that no single AC/SO could block exercise of any power.

Statement presented by Stefania Milan

A number of members of the NCSG are concerned about providing governments with the new powers contained in the Empowered Community and the impact of changing the fundamental nature of governments at ICANN by allowing GAC to be a Decisional Participant.

Recommendation #7: Strengthening ICANN’s Independent Review Process

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, Marília Maciel, Stefania Milan

The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 7 with the understanding that the revised Cooperative Engagement Procedure and the IRP processes will : 1) allow any person, group, or entity “materially affected” by an ICANN action or inaction in violation of ICANN’s Articles of Incorporation and/or Bylaws to have the right to equal participation in CEP and IRP proceedings on par with the original IRP filer; 2) require timely notification at filing to all parties known to be materially affected by the process or decision being challenged; 3) require ICANN to provide prompt and timely publication to the larger community of the filing so that other interested and materially affected parties can come forward to participate; and 4) enable and support the timely, full and equal participation of all materially affected parties in an IRP proceeding.  It is our understanding that reform of the Cooperative Engagement Process (CEP) is included in the IRP implementation plan.

Recommendation #8: Improving ICANN’s Request for Reconsideration Process

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, Marília Maciel, Stefania Milan

The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 8, but emphasise that the Ombudsman may not be the proper office to evaluate a RFR and make an initial recommendation to the BGC. We encourage WS2 to consider whether another office or official should be  granted this authority instead.  We want to emphasize that this responsibility should be independent or at a minimum neutral and insulated from pressure from the ICANN Board and staff. Under no circumstances should ICANN's Office of the General Counsel assume this responsibility.

Recommendation #10: Enhancing the Accountability of Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, Stefania Milan

The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 10, but are concerned that Recommendation 10 would allow the Board too much control over SO/AC reviews that could  undermine the bottom-up structure of ICANN. Therefore, implementation of Recommendation 10 should ensure that the terms of reference of a review should be developed in a cooperative manner between the Board and the AC/SO under review. The GNSO also believes as a matter of fairness that the GAC, if it becomes a decisional participant in ICANN, should also be subject to some manner of review as with the other AC/SOs.

Recommendation #11: Board Obligations with Regard to Governmental Advisory Committee Advice

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, Marília Maciel

The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation welcome the important accountability reform of locking-in the definition of “consensus advice” for the Governmental Advisory Committee, which triggers the board’s obligation to consider that advice and reach a mutually agreeable solution. Nonetheless we remain concerned because it raises the threshold by which the board can refuse to follow GAC advice.

Statement presented by Stefania Milan

A number of NCSG members remain concerned about providing GAC enhanced power over the ICANN Board of Directors, and about the Board’s ability to refuse to follow GAC advice, particularly when said advice contradicts policy developed through the bottom-up policy development process by the ICANN community.

Recommendation #12: Committing to Further Accountability Work in Work Stream 2

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, Marília Maciel, Stefania Milan

The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 12 with the understanding that WS2 issues, while not necessary for the transition to occur, remain vitally important and must be budgeted and supported at a level sufficient to ensure their development and implementation.

--
Marília Maciel
Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School
http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts

DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu<http://www.diplomacy.edu>
PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/
Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20160309/700353ee/attachment.html>