[council] Fwd: Rec 2.3 Next Steps

[陳曼茹 Manju Chen]

Hello Councilors,

As the GNSO Council representative to the WS2 Community Coordination Group
(CCG), I'm forwarding this question from the WS2 CCG to seek your feedback.
I propose we add this to the AOB for our Council meeting this Friday.

As noted in Alperen's email below, the WS2 CCG was tasked to deal with WS2
rec 2.3. The problem is that rec 2.3 is sort of contingent on the
completion of rec 2.1 and 2.2 by all SO/AC. (These recommendations are
regarding the removal of individual ICANN Board Directors. Check the
complete recommendations here starting from page 19:
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-final-27mar18-en.pdf
)

GNSO is not one of the SO/ACs that hasn't completed the WS2 recommendation
2.1 and 2.2 implementation. In December last year, the Council resolved
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+2022-12-15>
to adopt the CCOICI WS2 Recommendations Report
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2022/draft/draft-ccoici-ws2-recommendations-report-final-02nov22.en_.pdf>.
In the report, the CCOICI marked all but one relevant recommendation as
implementation completed; the only recommendation (2.1.2) marked as
'implementation planned' was implemented right after Council's adoption.

Above is my poor attempt to provide context for the discussion later this
week. My primary suggestion is to let the CCOICI handle this while we work
on reviewing the CCOICI pilot, as CCOICI has dealt with the WS2
recommendations and is therefore familiar with the topics.

Thanks!

Best,
Manju


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Alperen Eken <alperen.eken at icann.org>
Date: Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 7:06 PM
Subject: Rec 2.3 Next Steps
To: WS2 CCG <ws2-ccg at icann.org>
Cc: Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr at gmail.com>, Jonathan Zuck <
JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>, McAuley, David <dmcauley at verisign.com>, Suada
Hadzovic <shadzovic at rak.ba>, 陳曼茹 Manju Chen <manju at nii.org.tw>, Melissa
Peters Allgood <melissa.allgood at icann.org>, Devan Reed <devan.reed at icann.org
>


Dear Community Coordination Group Participants,



I hope this email finds you well.



This group was created with the approval of SO and AC chairs and attached,
you can find the Summary of Proposal for a Work Stream 2 Community
Coordination Group, you can also find this on our wiki space. Below, you
will find the relevant part of the proposal to Recommendation 2.3:



*The WS2 Community Coordination Group will also be where the WS2
recommendations or topics that can benefit from a uniform, community-wide
approach will be identified and addressed.Specifically, the CCWG
recommendations that appear to benefit from community coordination are
Recommendation 1.1(on seven proposed elements of diversity), Recommendation
1.7(on a process for handling complaints about diversity), and
Recommendation 2.3(on a standalone framework for exercising Empowered
Community powers).*



And you can find the wording of the Recommendation 2.3
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-final-24jun18-en.pdf>
(p.20) below for reference:



*Rec 2.3.1**: A standard framework be developed and used to raise the issue
of Board removal to the respective body – either the specific SO/AC who
appointed the member or the Decisional Participant in the case of a NomCom
appointee. The framework would be in the context of developing a broader
framework for implementing community powers and entering into the
discussions contemplated by WS1. This framework could be developed by a new
group specifically formed for that purpose.*

*Rec 2.3.2**: Implement the guidelines as a community best practice to
apply to all discussions even if not covered by the indemnities
contemplated under Article 20. There may be discussions around rejecting a
budget or rejecting a proposed standard Bylaw that would benefit from a
good faith process. The guidelines for engaging discussions around Board
removal could be adopted as a universal standard given that they are broad
enough to encompass any discussion.*



Per the initial proposal for this group above, the group was tasked to
handle the WS2 Rec 2.3. However, given that the rest of the recommendations
(Rec 2.1 and Rec 2.2) were not completed for all groups yet, we would like
to ask you the following questions. We are looking for responses from your
respective groups’ leadership or relevant structures *by the end of
October, *hence we would like to propose canceling our next meeting in 2
weeks and schedule one towards the end of November to discuss your
responses, please let us know if you want to keep the next meeting. Also please
note that this recommendation applies only to *ALAC, ASO, ccNSO, GAC and
GNSO** (Relevant members are copied in the email.**)*



   1. How does your group approach this recommendation, does your group
   intend to implement this good practice recommendation or not? Please note
   that implementation of this recommendation will require coordination within
   this group per the initial proposal.

*Answer: *



   1. Should the WS2 CCG discuss these recommendations immediately or
   should the group wait until each relevant AC and SO completes the WS2 Rec
   2.1 and 2.2?

*Answer: *



   1. If your group thinks that this recommendation should be handled
   elsewhere, please include your suggestions.

*Answer:*



Best regards,



Alp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20230920/8a4efedf/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 21 December 2021 Summary of Proposal for a WS2 CCG.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 66184 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20230920/8a4efedf/21December2021SummaryofProposalforaWS2CCG-0001.pdf>