Fwd: [Acct-Staff] Sidley and Adler Comments on Drafts for Legal Review: First set of 2
All, At Mathieu's request please find the latest input from the Sidley team. Cheers. B. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Gregory, Holly <holly.gregory@sidley.com> Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:58 AM Subject: [Acct-Staff] Sidley and Adler Comments on Drafts for Legal Review: First set of 2 To: Thomas Rickert <thomas@rickert.net>, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía < leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>, Hillary Jett <hillary.jett@icann.org>, "acct-staff@icann.org" <acct-staff@icann.org> Cc: Sidley ICANN CCWG <sidleyicannccwg@sidley.com>, "icann@adlercolvin.com" <icann@adlercolvin.com> Dear CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs and ICANN Staff, Here are our comments on the documents we received on Friday. We are sending the documents below in this email and will send you another email with the remainder shortly. · Section 2: Accountability Mechanisms · Section 2: SO/AC Accountability · Section 3B: Fundamental Bylaws · Section 5A: Community Mechanism · Section 5B.2: Standard Bylaws · Section 5B.3: Removing individual ICANN directors · Section 5B.4: Recalling the entire ICANN Board · Section 5C: Diversity · Section 5C: Staff Accountability Requirements · Section 6: Incorporation of the AoC Please let us know if there is anything you would like to discuss. Kind regards, Holly and Rosemary and the Sidley and Adler Teams *HOLLY* *J.* *GREGORY* Partner *Sidley Austin LLP* +1.212.839.5853 holly.gregory@sidley.com **************************************************************************************************** This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us immediately. **************************************************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Acct-Staff mailing list Acct-Staff@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/acct-staff
In Section 5A (Community Mechanism) it now says: "Under these arrangements the decisions and powers of the CMSM could be enforced through the internal IRP process with the force of binding arbitration and, if necessary, further backed through judicial proceedings." This wording isn't very clear, in several respects. 1) Is it the intent that the single member would automatically have standing before the IRP? If so, that needs to be reflected in Section 4 (IRP). 2) One of the key reasons for selecting the Sole Member model was this it would have the power to require ICANN to enter into and use the IRP process with the force of binding arbitration and, if necessary, that that requirement would be further backed through judicial proceedings - not only for disputes relating to the use by the Sole Member of its power (as stated here), but also as the means of last recourse for resolving other disputes. It is important that this should be reflected in this text so that the public, and indeed ICANN/ and NTIA, are all clear about our intent. -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
participants (2)
-
Bernard Turcotte -
Malcolm Hutty