[Gnso-bylaws-dt] Final Call: Guidelines for Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR

[Heather Forrest]

Huge thanks to Ariel for taking the lead on finalising the Joint
Consultation Guidelines.

For those who were unable to attend the call on Monday with the ccNSO
Guidelines Review Committee, I took away from that meeting that we were all
comfortable with the substance of the Joint Consultation Guidelines. The
call mainly focused on the next steps and logistics, and in particular
whether and how there would be some sort of symbolic joint signing in
Montreal by the two Councils. What did come to me as a surprise was that
the ccNSO potentially may not vote on this in Montreal - only a surprise to
me because it was Katrina and Bart who had, months ago, proposed the
timeline, and that's what we in the DT have been working to since.

After follow-up conversations with Ariel, Julie and the GNSO Council
leadership team, I feel quite comfortable in proposing that the DT remains
on track to submit both the Joint Consultation Guideline and the
GNSO-specific guideline of which the Joint Consultation Guideline is a part
in time for the Montreal Council meeting document deadline. That deadline
is this Sunday 2359 UTC.

You may recall that David was initially tasked during our final review
efforts to look over 18.12 - he did so, raised a few queries to the DT
list, but then suggested that it be parked for yet one more final review
once the Joint Consultation Guidelines were completed. David's queries have
since been addressed by Ariel's revisions, and in the meantime she is
proposing some further revisions to actually de-complicate the process.
When we first started our work, we agreed to try out using the GNSO Input
Process (the "GIP") as a vehicle for the GNSO to weigh in on the triggering
events of a Special IFR. As we have learned along the way, and come to
better understand 18.12 and the Joint Consultation Guidelines, it seems to
me on careful discussion with Ariel and Julie (and David, whose questions
in final review quite rightly provoked further consideration) that the GIP,
which relies on a Council member filing a request for action, isn't
actually what we need for 18.12, because the triggering event for 18.12
isn't a request from a Councillor, but rather the Bylaws themselves and the
escalation and failure to resolve a performance issue under the IANA
contract. No "request" from a Councillor is needed to kick off the GNSO's
provision of input. That said, there are some very useful things in the
GIP, once one leaves aside the need for making a request, such as forming a
small team, the team preparing a report for Council's consideration, etc,
that serve this process well and do not conflict with the Bylaws 18.12
provisions.

I note for the record David's earlier remarks on the substance and
interpretation of 18.12(a)(i)-(iv) and their relationship to 18.3 and a
regular IFRT. I am not convinced that we can resolve the possible
differences in interpretation of these provisions until the event actually
occurs (hopefully never), but I also take comfort in the fact that ICANN
Legal is reviewing each Guideline, and to the extent that we have made a
material error in judgment, we hope that can be pointed out to us. Further,
I take comfort in the fact that each of these Guidelines is just that -a
Guideline, not a compulsory rule imposed on the GNSO Council. If
circumstances require or warrant a different course of action or timeline,
Council has full freedom to be nimble.

I am mindful that the timing is now tight, and that we are all rather
exhausted (mentally, physically) by the enormous work effort we have
sustained in the DT since early this year. I personally believe that the
edits that Ariel will circulate to the GNSO Guideline are uncontroversial,
but I very much welcome everyone on the DT to review. Remember that ICANN
Legal is also reviewing in the background, and will raise any concerns if
these arise. If we believe that more time is needed beyond this Friday to
finalise this last document, I can advise Council and the ccNSO and we'll
hold 18.12 back until Council's December meeting. Once Ariel circulates the
final proposed 18.12 Guideline, I will ask that each DT member state by
Friday their position - can be one-on-one to me or to the group, as each
prefers. The options will be to sign-off on the Guideline and submit to
Council or hold back for more time for a further review and discussion.

Very best wishes,

Heather

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 1:40 PM Ariel Liang <ariel.liang at icann.org> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
>
>
> Following the meeting with the ccNSO GRC on Monday, staff have resolved
> the edits and comments on the Guidelines for Joint Consultation on
> Initiation of a Special IFR:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daPmnbI/edit?usp=sharing.
>
>
>
>
> There have been no substantive changes on this document, so please provide
> your final review by *COB Friday, 25 October*. The aim is to incorporate
> this document in the whole package of guidelines for the GNSO Council to
> adopt at ICANN66.
>
>
>
> In addition, staff are in process revising the GNSO internal guidelines
> for Section 18.12, as we have realized that the GIP may be an ‘overkill’ in
> the process and has been overtaken by events. More details will be provided
> when we circulate the revised guidelines tomorrow.
>
>
>
> Thank you!
>
> Ariel
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-bylaws-dt mailing list
> Gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-bylaws-dt
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-bylaws-dt/attachments/20191023/6e59bb56/attachment.html>