[SubPro-IRT] Update to Predictability

[Lars Hoffmann]

Dear members of the SubPro IRT-


Following last week’s discussion, I just updated the draft Predictability Framework in suggestion mode, so you can see the changes more easily. See google doc here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-D-Xan1Z99kkimsRFCPqPvpODL-Z-XUSzqqIMTOUpL0/edit; track changes PDF attached, too.



In addition, Susan asked the following question during last week’s IRT call<https://community.icann.org/x/94GCDg>, in the context of the Council’s role in relation to the SPIRT, outside of amending existing or developing new policies: “@Lars, so you are saying Council could do the GGP, when it is finished they say - yes we need new policy or no, this is within the policy, no change required.  And until they reach that determination Council hasn't determined that ‘no policy development is required’”?


During the IRT call, I committed to send an answer on-list and here it is:


Based on the SPIRT recommendations, this is how ICANN org sees the role of the GNSO Council in relation to the SPIRT:

  1.  The Council assesses an issue that the SPIRT brings to it (including the SPIRT recommendation on how to proceed) or, inversely, assesses one that it (the Council) would like to bring to the SPIRT’s attention.
  2.  The Council determines whether the change that is required to the program rises to the level of a policy change, i.e., a change to an existing policy or the development of a new policy.
  3.  The Council launches a process to develop the policy as it sees fit.
  4.  The new/amended policy, once adopted by the Board, will affect not the current but the next round.

If the Council does not believe that a policy change is required, this would mean that there is a change that is required that is essentially an implementation change, because the Council has determined that the required change would be consistent with existing policy. If it is a change that would have a material impact on one or more applicants, the SPIRT has the option to collaborate with ICANN org, and the SPIRT and org would seek to come to an agreement on the approach.



I hope this provides some clarity. Please let us know if you have further questions or issues that you would like to discuss on this topic.


I would also like to add to the GGP discussion that took place last week, as it is somewhat connected to this. As a reminder, IRT members said that the Council may also want to provide guidance to the ongoing Program via a GNSO Guidance Process (GGP). A couple of IRT members noted that since such guidance would affect the Program it should be included in the Framework, possibly as a new category (in addition to the currently proposed three categories: minor operation, non-minor operations, and policy change).


While I suggest we pick this up as part of the discussion during the next IRT meeting, I have consulted internally and wanted to provide some of our thinking for why we do not think this is necessary:


The Council is able to launch a GGP in accordance with Annex A-2 of the Bylaws at any time and for any reasons it deems relevant - the Council is also free to discuss the launch of a GGP with the SPIRT or any other group.

The implementation of such guidance, once the Board has adopted it, is covered by the Bylaws, which state: “Upon a final decision of the Board adopting the guidance, the Board shall, as appropriate, give authorization or direction to ICANN staff to implement the GNSO Guidance. If deemed necessary, the Board may direct ICANN Staff to work with the GNSO Council to create a guidance implementation plan, if deemed necessary, based upon the guidance recommendations identified in the Final Recommendation(s) Report.”


Therefore, the GGP is an instrument the Council can use at any time. It does not require inclusion in the Framework as its use, processes, and implementation are detailed in the Bylaws. To ensure it is clear to applicants that the Council has this ability to launch a GGP, we believe it most prudent to note explicitly that the Predictability Framework does not impact the GNSO Council’s abilities and powers under the Bylaws, including to provide Guidance or launch other processes detailed in the Bylaws at its discretion. And that, if the Council launches such a process, it is governed by the relevant sections in the Bylaws. Please see updated language in the introductory paragraph<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-D-Xan1Z99kkimsRFCPqPvpODL-Z-XUSzqqIMTOUpL0/edit>.


Looking forward to picking this up during tomorrow’s discussion.

Best wishes,

Lars




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/subpro-irt/attachments/20230710/3e008160/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: EXT_IRT_Topic 2_Predictability Framework.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 234414 bytes
Desc: EXT_IRT_Topic 2_Predictability Framework.pdf
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/subpro-irt/attachments/20230710/3e008160/EXT_IRT_Topic2_PredictabilityFramework-0001.pdf>