[Gnso-bylaws-dt] Comments/Questions re ICANN Bylaws & GNSO Procedures Mapping

[Steve DelBianco]

Thanks, Darcy.  Will include your suggestions in the updated draft I’ll circulate tonight.

Regarding your question about Annex D, 1.4, I looked at the new ICANN bylaws ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en ) and Section 1.4 covers three EC actions (fundamental bylaws, Articles of Incorporation, and Asset Sales):


The processes set forth in this Article 1 shall govern the escalation procedures for the EC’s exercise of its right to approve the following (each, an “Approval Action”) under the Bylaws:

  1.  Fundamental Bylaw Amendments, as contemplated by Section 25.2 of the Bylaws;
  2.  Articles Amendments, as contemplated by Section 25.2 of the Bylaws; and
  3.  Asset Sales, as contemplated by Article 26 of the Bylaws.

From: <gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell at endurance.com<mailto:darcy.southwell at endurance.com>>
Date: Friday, October 7, 2016 at 4:37 PM
To: "gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org>" <gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org>>
Subject: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] Comments/Questions re ICANN Bylaws & GNSO Procedures Mapping

Seems like we’ll be pressed for time on Monday so I thought I’d share these three items in advance of our meeting.

In re-reading the rest of the ICANN Bylaws & GNSO Procedures Mapping, I suggest that 25.2(b) and 26(a) would be more appropriately supported by a Supermajority vote.   A Supermajority is more consistent with the Bylaws’ requirement of approval of 3/4 of the Board as well as the DT’s recommendation regarding issues like 16.2 PTI Governance.

Re Annex D, 1.3(b), it looks like the EC has the right to request a publicly-available conference call.  Based on the included questions, I’m guessing we don’t have more clarity here, but it seems as though we need to have some threshold identified as to how the GNSO (as a decision participant in the EC) contributes to that decision.  Given that this is just the right to request to hold this call, I suggest a simple majority of each house approve the GNSO’s position in such a case.

Re Annex D, 1.4, seems like we need a voting threshold for deciding whether the GNSO will vote for or against or abstain.  Can someone provide some guidance as to what types of decisions may be coming up?  I realize we’re just speculating.

Thanks,
Darcy

__________
Darcy Southwell | Compliance Officer
M: +1 503-453-7305 │ Skype: darcy.enyeart
[https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/tjCmzaF_7ZGN1PtB2KAV5OVQn-Q_Xvh_p3zhRf5gB5-ISEZOkC_6lvGj1xU-T1CFq2ojDyg9cW5rg41SN5rxGkY=s0-d-e1-ft#http://endurance.com/img/nav/logo_large.png]


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-bylaws-dt/attachments/20161007/54e43de9/attachment-0001.html>