Thank you Seb.

I had a cursory review and I don't see what I have recommended is implemented or been considered. I could not properly attend all the the Ombuds group meetings but I don't think that means my comments should not be considered.

I have to raise my concerns which I have reiterated over and over in that group and seems like not many people agree with me, so I might have to file a dissent but I'd like to raise my concerns here as well:

1. I don't think we can solve the problem of independence by giving the ombudspersons a 5 year contract. I have provided my reasons before. If by 5 years fixed contract you mean the Ombuds office as an entity should be given a fixed term contract that is fine. But ombudspersons getting fixed five-year contract won't solve the problem.

2. Ombuds has to be an office and not a person. At the moment it's a person. I think to maintain the independence of the office, we need to have preferably an external organization that provides ombuds services and its revenue is not only dependent on ICANN. That way we can ensure independence.

3. Under no circumstances, the ombudspersons should socialize and befriend community members ( this is a very obvious independence element, have you ever encountered the decision maker of your case at a social event talking and smiling at the party you filed a complaint against? It is written in first year legal text books that independence is very much affected by social encounters and interactions)

I don't think the current recommendations are sufficient enough to expand the ombuds office mandate. But I do need written reasons for not considering the points I have made. It is simply not enough that the WS2 group on Ombuds did not agree with my comments.

Please let me know what the process would be to file a dissent or if we can discuss it during the plenary.

Best

Farzaneh

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Sebicann Bachollet <sebicann@bachollet.fr> wrote:

19th September 2017,
Dear Co-Chairs,
The WS2 Sub-Group on ICANN Ombuds Office (IOO) is very pleased to present to the plenary of the CCWG on ICANN Accountability WS2 our Report titled ‘CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-DrafRecommendationsV2.2’ for first reading, discussion, review, comments and consideration. It was finalized, on Monday 18^th of September 2017 at the 30^th meeting of the IOO Sub-Group.
As IOO Sub Group Rapporteur I will be pleased to answer any questions and discuss any comments from our CCWG.
I would like to take this opportunity to thanks the participants of our IOO Sub-group and Bernard for his support to finalize the attached documents.
All the best
IOO Sub Group Rapporteur,
Sebastien Bachollet
Attached:

IOO first Report

External evaluator’s final report

_______________________________________________
Ws2-ombudsman mailing list
Ws2-ombudsman@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-ombudsman