January 2016 - Accountability-Cross-Community

Role of an ombudsman
by Bruce Tonkin Jan. 23, 2016

Jan. 23, 2016

Hello Edward, >> My concern is that traditionally the Ombudsman is restricted to acting strictly on the basis of fairness. We seem in a number of areas to be attempting to expand his or her remit into that more akin to an Inspector General or Ombudsman plus. It is probably useful to see how the role of an Ombudsman has evolved. See: http://www.ombudsmanassociation.org/about-the-role-of-an-ombudsman.php The institution of the ombudsman, first created in Sweden more than 200 years ago, is designed to provide protection for the individual where there is a substantial imbalance of power. What ombudsmen do • Ombudsmen offer their services free of charge, and are thus accessible to individuals who could not afford to pursue their complaints through the courts. • They are committed to achieving redress for the individual, but also, where they identify systemic failings, to seek changes in the work of the bodies in their jurisdiction, both individually and collectively. • They can generally undertake a single investigation into multiple complaints about the same topic, thus avoiding duplication and excessive cost. • They are neutral arbiters and not advocates nor “consumer champions”. • They normally ask the body concerned and the complainant to try to resolve complaints before commencing an investigation. • They usually seek to resolve disputes without resort to formal investigations where this is possible and desirable. • Where they identify injustice, they seek to put this right. Also from an example in the Australian Government: http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/pages/publications-and-media/reports/annual/ar2… “The guiding principle in an Ombudsman investigation is whether the administrative action under investigation is unlawful, unreasonable, unjust, oppressive, improperly discriminatory, factually deficient, or otherwise wrong. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Ombudsman can recommend that corrective action be taken by an agency. This may occur either specifically in an individual case or more generally by a change to relevant legislation, administrative policies or procedures. A key objective of the Ombudsman is to foster good public administration within Australian Government agencies, ensuring that the principles and practices of public administration are sensitive, responsive and adaptive to the interests of members of the public.” Hope that helps. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

2 1

Board comments on Recommendation 2: Escalation timeframes
by Bruce Tonkin Jan. 23, 2016

Jan. 23, 2016

Hello All, On Escalation Timeframes (Recommendation 2), the Board has the following comment following the second reading: The Board reiterates its support for the modifications to the escalation timeframes, as well as flexibility within those procedures, so long as the timeframes and procedures allow the community to socialize the issues appropriately. The Board is supportive of the proposed times for the steps as reflected in the document produced after the second reading. The Board is supportive of the language at paragraph 50, as well as the removal of paragraph 51 (which were previously paragraphs 62 and 64, respectively, as discussed in the Board's comments after the first reading) and believe that the removal addresses the concern that the threshold for the removal of the entire Board will not fall below four SOs or ACs. Regards, Bruce Tonkin ICANN Board liaison to the CCWG

2 1

GNSO Council Response to CCWG-ACCT Third Draft Proposal
by James M. Bladel Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

Dear CCWG-Accountabilty Members and Participants - On behalf of myself and the GNSO Council Vice Chairs, please find attached the GNSO Council's response to the CCWG-Accountability Third Draft Proposal. Thank you, J.

1 0

CCWG - Rec 3 - Final version for legal review
by Bernard Turcotte Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

All, Per the request of the co-chairs we are publishing the final draft version of Annex 3 for legal review. This version has been generated from the conclusion of the second reading document and includes a listing of major changes in the header of the document - Attached. Once this legal review is completed (48 hours), results of the review will be published on this list and a final version will be generated and posted for final CCWG comments. Thank You. Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support for CCWG

1 0

Request to set clear deadlines at this stage
by Oscar A. Robles-Garay Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

Dear Leon, Mathieu and Thomas, The Address Supporting Organization(ASO) would like to thank the CCWG Co-Chairs for your continued commitments in leading the group to complete the proposal. We would like to express our comment on the discussions at the CCWG Call #79 on 21th Jan about the timelines. Given the time for pending decisions and actions are becoming shorter we strongly request the CCWG to have clear visibility on the extended timelines, because we believe the success of this process will rely on that clarity. Specifically, the ASO requests the CCWG Chairs to set a clear date to receive feedback from the remaining SO and AC, so that the updated timelines can be developed and shared in a timely manner. Thank you once again for your hard work and efforts. We trust that with your leadership, we are very close to the end of the process. Oscar Robles Chair, NRO EC

3 2

Recommendation 8 - Reconsideration - 1st reading conclusions
by Alice Jansen Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

Sent on behalf of CoChairs 1. The following concerns will be addressed in implementation: ¥ Concerns raised during comment: i. There is a recommendation that this tool should not be regarded in isolation but rather as one among other mechanisms. ii. • Concern was raised that the ombudsman is not sufficiently equipped and knowledgeable to do substantive evaluation. It is also suggested that an independent party, such as the Ombudsman, provide an initial assessment to the Board as to the merit of any and all Reconsideration Requests. iii. • There is a call for Reconsideration Requests to be transparent and fully communicated to all ICANN stakeholders. Second reading is planned for Thursday, 28 January. Best regards Mathieu, Thomas, León

3 2

Agenda topics - Calls #80 - #81
by Alice Jansen Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

On behalf of CoChairs Dear all, As we prepare for the last week of calls dedicated to finalizing our recommendations, we would like to share with you agenda topics that we anticipate for calls #80 and #81. Please note that some of these are dependent on input we receive from the GNSO, GAC and CWG-Stewardship. We will share revised versions along with timing closer to the date. We look forward to your participation in these calls. Best regards Mathieu, Thomas, León --- Call#80 1. Welcome, roll call, SoI 2. Update on Chartering Organizations’ input 2. Update on Board removal liability mitigation 3. Review of CWG-Stewardship feedback * Budget * PTI & IRP 4. Rec 6 – Human Rights – Third reading 5. Rec 9 – AOC reviews - Second reading – see http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2016-January/0… 6. Rec 5 – Mission Statement - Fourth reading * Root servers and numbers language * Contract enforcement * Grandfathering 7. Timeline & next steps – see http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20… 8. A.O.B ----------- Call #81 1 Welcome, Roll Call & SOI 2 Rec 1 – GAC as decisional participant - Second reading - http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2016-January/0… 3 Rec 10 – SO/AC accountability - Second reading - http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2016-January/0… 4 Rec 8 – Reconsideration - Second reading - http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2016-January/0… 5 Rec 11 – GAC Advice – Second reading 6 A.O.B

1 0

Recommendation 1 - GAC as decisional participant - 1st reading conclusions
by Alice Jansen Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

Sent on behalf of CoChairs Please find below the initial conclusions of our deliberations during call #79. The updated document is attached. GAC to participate in Empowered Community as Decisional Participant (p.7). Conclusion subject to GAC input (if any). Second reading is planned for Thursday, 28 January. Best regards Mathieu, Thomas, León

1 0

Recommendation 10 - SO/AC Accountability - 1st reading conclusions
by Alice Jansen Jan. 22, 2016

Jan. 22, 2016

Sent on behalf of CoChairs Please find below the initial conclusions of our deliberations during call #79. The updated document is attached. 1.Discuss concern raised during 1st reading about Board’s ability to change SO or ACs based on these reviews : a.Process to handle outcome of reviews : i.Current process : The results of such reviews shall be posted on the Website for public review and comment, and shall be considered by the Board no later than the second scheduled meeting of the Board after such results have been posted for 30 days. The consideration by the Board includes the ability to revise the structure or operation of the parts of ICANN being reviewed by a two-thirds vote of all members of the Board. (Bylaws) ii.Future state : any structural change that affects the Bylaws will follow the Bylaw change process (with Empowered Community oversight) b.Operational details about the review process : https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/org 2.Discuss suggestion to subject GAC to independent structural reviews. 3.Confirm that all comments can be handled as part of the WS2 deliberations a.Summary of comments i. Accountability of SO/ACs is considered critical given the powers and roles of an Empowered Community that the transition would provide them with. ii.Accountability to the global community is also deemed important in this context. Three levels of accountability are suggested: 1) Accountability of SO/AC to whole community; 2) Accountability of SO/AC representatives to communities when acting as Designator; 3) Future structure of ICANN resulting from transition including accountability aspects and related checks and balances. • Some contributors believe that SO/AC Accountability improvements need to be given immediate attention. Creating a “Mutual Accountability Roundtable” involving representatives of the ICANN Board, Community and Staff, developing a detailed plan on enhancing SO and AC accountability and applying the Independent Review process to SO and AC activities are considered crucial to Work Stream 2.” Second reading is planned for Thursday, 28 January. Best regards Mathieu, Thomas, León

1 0

CCWG - Rec 12 - Final draft for CCWG comments
by Bernard Turcotte Jan. 21, 2016

Jan. 21, 2016

All, Per the request of the co-chairs we are publishing the final draft version of Annex 12 for comments by the CCWG. This is based on the version circulated yesterday which was sent to the lawyers for review. You will find attached 2 documents, one with track changes and the other clean. The comment period for the CCWG will run from 18:00 UTC Thursday 21 January and will close at 18:00 UTC Saturday 23 January - providing the 48 hour comment period. Please make your comments via email to the full CCWG list and use the following subject line to identify your email as being a comment on this: *CCWG - Rec 12 - Final draft for CCWG comments* or simply reply to this email. Comments will be compiled in semi-real time by staff in a google sheet at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fnInYAmWIQiHmsCqxE6jSL7DNY4H85aBrlP… Please note that the CCWG legal team is currently working with ICANN legal on a proposal for Recommendation 6 (email from Holly.Gregory(a)sidley.com titled Report on Lawyers Call re Human Rights dated 20 January) . If this work is successful it will require amending Recommendation 6 and making an amendment to Recommendation 12 to reflect the change in Recommendation 6 (as noted in the email). If this is the case Recommendation 12 will be posted again for comments by the CCWG. Once the comment period is completed the co-chairs and Rapporteurs will review the comments and a final version will be produced for a final legal check. Thank You. Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support for CCWG

1 0