Dear All, I very much appreciate the positiove and friendly tiones of Co-chairs as well as the positive reply from the chairman of the Board. However, I strongly oppose to the formation of any closed group irrespective of their willingness and competence due to the fact that CCWG can not delegate its mandate to any closed group. We must openly, freely, democvraticly and transparently discuss any point of the accoun tabilty within the ENTIRE GROUP Pls do not take any action which is not allowed by our charter Esrtablish any group but fully open to all participants and intrested persons. See my previous message in this regard Regards Kavouss 2015-09-29 8:39 GMT+02:00 Steve Crocker <steve.crocker@icann.org>:
Mathieu, (and Leon and Thomas),
Thanks for your very kind, forward-looking and comprehensive message. I apologize for not responding immediately. I was totally consumed today chairing the Board retreat. It was an intense day but it was also productive.
As you have suggested, your message has been shared with our full Board, and I have copied them in this response.
As we proposed on Saturday, we have assigned Cherine Chalaby, Rinalia Abdul Rahim and Bruce Tonkin to work closely with the three of you and with the SO/AC chairs. Rinalia and Bruce will be in transit during the call in about twelve hours, but Cherine will be present and active. In addition, Fadi will be on the call, per your agenda, and I will attend, primarily to listen.
In my view, we are actually in close agreement on all of the major requirements, and we’re also in close agreement on the method of implementation on many of those requirements. I am hopeful it will be possible to work out the details for the rest fairly soon.
With respect to your requests to share briefing materials and to have you co-chairs brief board on new developments, those are excellent suggestions and we readily agree. We will also look into adjusting the schedule in Dublin along the lines you are suggesting.
We are looking forward to the CCWG call in just over twelve hours and we look forward to frequent and substantive interaction over the next several days.
Steve
On Sep 28, 2015, at 9:29 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Mr Chairman, Dear Steve,
On behalf of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing Icann’s Accountability, we would like to formally express our deepest thanks for your suggestion to host a face to face meeting of our group in Los Angeles on 25th and 26th September 2015, and for making yourself and many Board members available during the meeting. Our group is grateful for such an opportunity to take our work further as well as benefit from the extended availability of many Board members.
Based on the substantial exchanges that took place during this meeting, we would also like to emphasize some suggestions related to Board – CCWG engagement in the future.
1. Board members have vast amount of experience regarding the issues our group is addressing. We would welcome their contributions as participants, not only in the CCWG but also in the various work parties we have set up. 2. Considering the very high interest from the community as well as from the Board members on the Accountability issue, we would suggest that Board meetings on the issue would deserve to be granted the highest possible transparency standards. Such meetings, as well as communications between CCWG members and Board members would benefit from being advertised publicly, as well as their conclusions. 3. At the same time, we reiterate our proposal to provide, as co-chairs, regular Board briefings during the Board meetings dedicated to Accountability, alongside the briefings provided by the President and staff. We would also welcome the opportunity to review the briefing materials received by Board members, and would understand if that was subject to a non disclosure agreement. 4. We would also appreciate an opportunity to extend the time dedicated to advancing our group and engaging with the Board during the Dublin Icann54 meeting. 5. Finally, we would also like to suggest the inclusion of regular updates about our work within the SO/AC Chair calls. On such matters, we would see extra value if the leaders of the other transition-related groups (ICG, CWG, …) could also be associated.
We hope that these steps will foster an even stronger trust in the multistakeholder, bottom up process that was set up to respond to the challenge set up by the transition of the NTIA Stewardship. As such, they would certainly contribute to the success of this process, which is our common goal.
Our group is setting aggressive targets for its work on the basis of the recent comments received from the public, including the Icann Board. We remain committed, as volunteers, to dedicate the right level of efforts to deliver a consensus proposal. As mentioned during the meeting in Los Angeles, a reaffirmation of the Board’s commitment to the process, similar to the 16 October 2010 Board resolution on Board Consideration of Recommendations from our group, would be extremely helpful to avoid any misunderstanding.
The NTIA Stewardship transition is a historic opportunity. All components of the Icann multistakeholder model have to raise to the occasion and demonstrate unity of goal, sense of responsibility and commitment to the global public interest. Our hope is that these small steps contribute to our common success.
Best regards, Thomas Rickert, Leon Felipe Sanchez & Mathieu Weill
PS: Please feel free to share this correspondence to the Icann Board.
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community