Why would we
list in WS2 an inquiry into possible problems we have not
yet identified and of which we are not yet aware? We might
as well list “possible adverse action by the GAC” or
“possible default by ICANN on its debt” or thousands of
other possibilities that are evanescent and indeterminate.
I agree, of course, that IF our inquiry suggests a real
problem it would be appropriate to place it on the WS2
agenda. But identifying as agenda item a contingent
possibility of indeterminate provenance simply because of
its political salience is, I respectfully submit,
inadmissible. WS2 is filled enough with problems and issues
we actually know exist … we shouldn’t put down placeholders
for every issue that some consider of possible merit.
Paul
Paul
Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202)
547-0660
M: +1 (202)
329-9650
VOIP: +1
(202) 738-1739
Skype:
paul.rosenzweig1066
From: Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva
[mailto:pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br]
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 5:12 PM
To: 'Greg Shatan'
Cc: accountability-cross-community@icann.org
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] RES: RES: Initial draft
section 8 - work stream 2
Dear Greg,
Thank you for the email.
We have just started to interact with
the legal firms and are slowly being acquainted with their
advice. In the course of the next weeks/months I believe we
will be able to better identify whether there are limitations
or not regarding ICANN's current jurisdiction. This is why I
wrote "possible accountability limitations".
Maybe the text at the end of the
sentence is a bit misleading, but I didn't mean they have been
already identified. This is still work in progress.
Regards,
Secretário Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva
Divisão da Sociedade da Informação (DI)
Ministério das Relações Exteriores - Brasil
T: + 55 61 2030-6609
Secretary Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva
Division
of Information Society (DI)
Ministry
of External Relations - Brazil
T:
+ 55 61 2030-6609
-----Mensagem original-----
De: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com]
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 16 de abril de 2015 18:02
Para: Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva
Cc: Mathieu.Weill@afnic.fr;
accountability-cross-community@icann.org
Assunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] RES: Initial draft section 8 - work
stream 2
Pedro,
First, your thanks
are very much appreciated, and I thank you for them in
return.
Second, would you be
so kind as to provide some of the possible accountability
limitations you refer to, or direct me to where they have
been identified? I would like to make sure that I understand
the concern.
Thank you in advance.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015
at 3:54 PM, Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva <pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br>
wrote:
Dear
CCWG-Colleagues,
I
suggest the following point be included:
-
Alternative options for ICANN's jurisdiction (understood as
'place of legal establishment') based on possible
accountability limitations related to the current
jurisdiction of the Corporation (identified during WS1);
I
assume the first item ("enhancements to ICANN's
accountability based on the law(s) applicable to its
actions") of the proposed WS2 list may also refer to
jurisdiction, but I believe a clear reference to the term
and to what we discussed in Istanbul is more adequate.
Note:
I take the opportunity to thank Greg Shatan for his useful
distinction of the various meanings associated with the term
'jurisdiction'.
Kind
regards,
Secretário Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva
Divisão da Sociedade da Informação (DI)
Ministério das Relações Exteriores - Brasil
T: +
55 61 2030-6609 <tel:%2B%2055%2061%202030-6609>
Secretary Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva
Division of Information Society (DI)
Ministry of External Relations - Brazil
T: +
55 61 2030-6609 <tel:%2B%2055%2061%202030-6609>
-----Mensagem original-----
De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org
[mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org]
Em nome de Mathieu Weill
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 16 de abril de 2015 10:58
Para:
accountability-cross-community@icann.org
Assunto: [CCWG-ACCT] Initial draft section 8 - work stream 2
Dear
Colleagues,
As
part of our planned report structure for public comment,
section 8 is planned to address work stream 2 : what items
would be considered and how would we ensure commitment that
they will indeed be addressed ? The task of assembling a
draft was assigned to the co-chairs in Istanbul.
With
precious help from staff, we are circulating this initial
draft, building on the idea of a transitional article in the
Bylaws, which seemed to get traction in Istanbul. The list
of items is very tentative.
the
status of the document is an Initial draft. Amendments sent
before Friday 17 Apr 15.00 UTC will be incorporated into the
“freeze period”
document. And of course, full and detailed review will be on
the agenda of our intense work days (so this is NOT an
urgent last call).
Thanks for your consideration,
--
*****************************
Mathieu WEILL
AFNIC
- directeur général
Tél:
+33 1 39 30 83 06 <tel:%2B33%201%2039%2030%2083%2006>
Twitter : @mathieuweill
*****************************
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community