I watched with astonishment as the multistakeholder model was disrupted by our own CEO who presented his personal views on the transition. Much time was devoted to a sales job in favor of binding arbitration as an "appeals mechanism" relative to Board decisions. As we know there is a very significant legal question as to whether the Board can delegate decisions in this arena to
binding arbitration, but this was not mentioned at all in the CEO's presentation. Further the CEO presented his personal view to the GAC that removal of directors should be taken care of by way of contract. thus, the slide deck that was displayed by the CEO and that has not yet been discussed within the CCW G Accountability since being revised was, in my personal opinion, used not as a communication tool, but rather as a MIS communication tool. Most importantly, the question before the community was presented as a need for an "appeals mechanism" and not as a need for enforceable community powers.
Mathieu certainly did his best to correct the errors in Fadi's presentation while remaining polite, but I fear there will be a great deal of misunderstanding of CCWG work as a result of Fadi's presentation.
I certainly hope this performance will not be repeated and look forward to Board action to restrain such miscommunication to the Community.
Anne
Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Tablet
------ Original message------
From: Jordan Carter
Date: Sat, Oct 17, 2015 10:33 AM
To: Accountability Cross Community;
Cc:
Subject:[CCWG-ACCT] Fadi on our work