URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path
Dear Colleagues, I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently. On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re... Summarised: The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving *accountability, transparency, and effectiveness* within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a *community dialogue* will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement. Key resolutions include: * *Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program* (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. * *Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review* (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. * *Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews* until the community dialogue informs next steps. * *Considering future actions* on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. * *Planning a community dialogue* on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. * *Recognising contributions* from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes. The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to *collaborative review mechanisms* that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent. Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite. This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007 The Board took this decision *against *ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003 So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned? The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws. The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4 * Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION * Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS * Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW * Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether. "Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened." The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi... Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by *20 December 2023*. The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now *18 months late* to start this. It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi). According to: /Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);/ The Board is acting against its own Bylaws. The ALAC should submit a *Reconsideration Request *without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws. A *Community Reconsideration Request* might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle. I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN... I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are *Bylaw-mandated* for a reason: in order to make sure that *ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust*, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain *open, fair, and aligned with the public interest.* The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop. I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity)
Dear ALAC Colleagues and Olivier, Thank you, Olivier, for raising this important issue so clearly and urgently. I fully support the concerns you’ve outlined regarding the Board’s decision to further delay ATRT4, which appears to conflict with ICANN’s Bylaws and undermines the principles of transparency and accountability we all work to uphold. To move forward constructively, I suggest we: 1. Convene an urgent coordination call to assess our formal options, including a possible Reconsideration Request. 2. Draft a short, principled response grounded in the Bylaws and ALAC’s previous advice, with clear rationale and supporting evidence. 3. *Engage with other SOs/ACs informally*, where appropriate, to gauge broader support or shared concerns. 4. *Submit our response before the deadline*, while framing it as a good-faith effort to uphold ICANN’s commitments—not as an adversarial act. This is a moment to demonstrate the value and integrity of the advisory model. I’m happy to help move this forward in any way I can. Cheers, Pari Esfandiari On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 12:34 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC < alac@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently.
On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...
Summarised:
The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving *accountability, transparency, and effectiveness* within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a *community dialogue* will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement.
Key resolutions include:
- *Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program* (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. - *Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review* (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. - *Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews* until the community dialogue informs next steps. - *Considering future actions* on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. - *Planning a community dialogue* on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. - *Recognising contributions* from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes.
The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to *collaborative review mechanisms* that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent.
Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite.
This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007
The Board took this decision *against *ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003
So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned?
The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws.
The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4
- Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION - Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS - Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW - Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS
The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether.
"Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened."
The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi...
Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by *20 December 2023*.
The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now *18 months late* to start this.
It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi).
According to:
*Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);*
The Board is acting against its own Bylaws.
The ALAC should submit a *Reconsideration Request *without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws.
A *Community Reconsideration Request* might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle.
I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN...
I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are *Bylaw-mandated* for a reason: in order to make sure that *ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust*, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain *open, fair, and aligned with the public interest.*
The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop.
I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Pari Esfandiari President *Global TechnoPolitics Forum <http://www.technopolitics.org> * *Pario <http://www.parioconsultants.com>- Architects of Ideas* info@TechnoPolitics.org <info@technopolitics.org> *Linkedin Profile <https://www.linkedin.com/in/pariesfandiari/>* Tel: +1-202*-735-1415* (Office) : +1-310-435-0888 (Cell) : +44-731-210-4049 (Cell)
In full support of OCL etc.al. **>The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop. I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.<*** I'm available for call, meeting whatever anytime in the short term, preferably during high tide Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter (For disclosure: member of ATRT3) El sábado, 31 de mayo de 2025 05:58, Pari Esfandiari via ALAC <alac@icann.org> escribió:
Dear ALAC Colleagues and Olivier, Thank you, Olivier, for raising this important issue so clearly and urgently. I fully support the concerns you’ve outlined regarding the Board’s decision to further delay ATRT4, which appears to conflict with ICANN’s Bylaws and undermines the principles of transparency and accountability we all work to uphold. To move forward constructively, I suggest we: * Convene an urgent coordination call to assess our formal options, including a possible Reconsideration Request. * Draft a short, principled response grounded in the Bylaws and ALAC’s previous advice, with clear rationale and supporting evidence. * ENGAGE WITH OTHER SOS/ACS INFORMALLY, where appropriate, to gauge broader support or shared concerns. * SUBMIT OUR RESPONSE BEFORE THE DEADLINE, while framing it as a good-faith effort to uphold ICANN’s commitments—not as an adversarial act. This is a moment to demonstrate the value and integrity of the advisory model. I’m happy to help move this forward in any way I can. Cheers, Pari Esfandiari On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 12:34 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues, I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently. On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re... Summarised: The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, AND EFFECTIVENESS within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a COMMUNITY DIALOGUE will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement. Key resolutions include: * PROGRESSING THE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. * CONCLUDING THE PILOT HOLISTIC REVIEW (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. * DEFERRING ATRT4, SSR, AND RDS SPECIFIC REVIEWS until the community dialogue informs next steps. * CONSIDERING FUTURE ACTIONS on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. * PLANNING A COMMUNITY DIALOGUE on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. * RECOGNISING CONTRIBUTIONS from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes. The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to COLLABORATIVE REVIEW MECHANISMS that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent. Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite. This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007 The Board took this decision AGAINST ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003 So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned? The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws. The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4 * Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION * Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS * Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW * Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether. "Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened." The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi... Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by 20 DECEMBER 2023. The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now 18 MONTHS LATE to start this. It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi). According to: _Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);_ The Board is acting against its own Bylaws. The ALAC should submit a RECONSIDERATION REQUEST without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws. A COMMUNITY RECONSIDERATION REQUEST might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle. I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN... I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are BYLAW-MANDATED for a reason: in order to make sure that ICANN REMAINS ACCOUNTABLE, TRANSPARENT, ENHANCING PUBLIC TRUST, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain OPEN, FAIR, AND ALIGNED WITH THE PUBLIC INTEREST. The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop. I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Pari Esfandiari President _GLOBAL TECHNOPOLITICS FORUM [http://www.technopolitics.org] _ _PARIO [http://www.parioconsultants.com]- ARCHITECTS OF IDEAS_ info@TechnoPolitics.org LINKEDIN PROFILE [https://www.linkedin.com/in/pariesfandiari/] Tel: +1-202-735-1415 (Office) : +1-310-435-0888 (Cell) : +44-731-210-4049 (Cell) ------------------------- _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you very much, Olivier, for pointing this out. I agree that a reconsideration is urgently needed. The arguments are reflected in the ALAC's previous report, which highlights the efforts made and the need to continue postponing ATR4. Regards Alberto Alberto De: Javier Rua via ALAC <alac@icann.org> Enviado el: sábado, 31 de mayo de 2025 10:31 Para: Pari Esfandiari <pariesfandiari@gmail.com>; Jonathan Zuck <jzuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>; Carlos Raúl Gutiérreaz <carlosraul@gutierrez.se>; Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> CC: ALAC Working List <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Asunto: [ALAC] Re: URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path All- Have been just monitoring ICANN lists for a while, without interacting. Must say that I’m grateful for colleagues like Olivier that cut through the noise and point out critical matters that truly require attention and engagement. IN FULL SUPPORT OF OCL. Javier Rúa-Jovet Individual Member NARALO Member of IGLC at CCNSO +1-787-396-6511 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua On May 31, 2025, at 8:18 AM, Carlos Raúl Gutiérreaz via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote: In full support of OCL etc.al. **>The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop. I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.<*** I'm available for call, meeting whatever anytime in the short term, preferably during high tide Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter (For disclosure: member of ATRT3) <https://workspace.storage.infomaniak.com/signature/e2da9566da4aac6adf43dc8b8...> El sábado, 31 de mayo de 2025 05:58, Pari Esfandiari via ALAC <alac@icann.org> escribió: Dear ALAC Colleagues and Olivier, Thank you, Olivier, for raising this important issue so clearly and urgently. I fully support the concerns you’ve outlined regarding the Board’s decision to further delay ATRT4, which appears to conflict with ICANN’s Bylaws and undermines the principles of transparency and accountability we all work to uphold. To move forward constructively, I suggest we: 1. Convene an urgent coordination call to assess our formal options, including a possible Reconsideration Request. 2. Draft a short, principled response grounded in the Bylaws and ALAC’s previous advice, with clear rationale and supporting evidence. 3. Engage with other SOs/ACs informally, where appropriate, to gauge broader support or shared concerns. 4. Submit our response before the deadline, while framing it as a good-faith effort to uphold ICANN’s commitments—not as an adversarial act. This is a moment to demonstrate the value and integrity of the advisory model. I’m happy to help move this forward in any way I can. Cheers, Pari Esfandiari On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 12:34 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org <mailto:alac@icann.org> > wrote: Dear Colleagues, I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently. On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re... Summarised: The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving accountability, transparency, and effectiveness within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a community dialogue will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement. Key resolutions include: * Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. * Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. * Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews until the community dialogue informs next steps. * Considering future actions on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. * Planning a community dialogue on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. * Recognising contributions from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes. The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to collaborative review mechanisms that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent. Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite. This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007 The Board took this decision against ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003 So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned? The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws. The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4 * Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION * Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS * Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW * Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether. "Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened." The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi... Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by 20 December 2023. The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now 18 months late to start this. It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi). According to: Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies); The Board is acting against its own Bylaws. The ALAC should submit a Reconsideration Request without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws. A Community Reconsideration Request might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle. I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN... I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are Bylaw-mandated for a reason: in order to make sure that ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain open, fair, and aligned with the public interest. The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop. I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org <mailto:alac@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org <mailto:alac-leave@icann.org> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Pari Esfandiari President <http://www.technopolitics.org> Global TechnoPolitics Forum <http://www.parioconsultants.com> Pario - Architects of Ideas <mailto:info@technopolitics.org> info@TechnoPolitics.org <https://www.linkedin.com/in/pariesfandiari/> Linkedin Profile Tel: +1-202-735-1415 (Office) : +1-310-435-0888 (Cell) : +44-731-210-4049 (Cell) _____ _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear colleagues, First, I want to echo my thanks to Olivier for bringing this important issue to our attention in such a clear and thoughtful manner. If the concerns he raises are confirmed, particularly with respect to a potential breach of the Bylaws regarding the postponement of ATRT4, I believe ALAC would indeed have little choice but to proceed with the actions he suggests, namely the submission of a Reconsideration Request. Upholding ICANN's accountability, as enshrined in its Bylaws, is fundamental. Thank you very much for considering this urgent matter. Regards,
El 31-05-2025, a las 7:34 a.m., Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> escribió:
Dear Colleagues,
I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently.
On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...
Summarised: The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving accountability, transparency, and effectiveness within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a community dialogue will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement.
Key resolutions include:
Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews until the community dialogue informs next steps. Considering future actions on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. Planning a community dialogue on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. Recognising contributions from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes. The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to collaborative review mechanisms that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent.
Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite.
This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007
The Board took this decision against ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003
So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned?
The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws.
The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4
Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether.
"Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened."
The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi...
Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by 20 December 2023.
The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now 18 months late to start this.
It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi).
According to:
Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by:
(i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);
The Board is acting against its own Bylaws.
The ALAC should submit a Reconsideration Request without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws.
A Community Reconsideration Request might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle.
I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN...
I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are Bylaw-mandated for a reason: in order to make sure that ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain open, fair, and aligned with the public interest.
The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop.
I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear colleagues, In addition to the other recommendations here, let me add this. I think it might be worthwhile contacting the ICANN General Counsel regarding the conflict between the Board's decision and the By-laws. Only recall the last time the California Attorney General found it necessary to initiate legal action (over the proposed .org transfer) against ICANN for failing to live up to its legal obligations. I doubt anyone is enthused about going thru that kind of thing again. But that's what the Board is setting us up for. Having their own lawyer point that out might help concentrate some minds. Regards, Bill Jouris Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 4:34 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC<alac@icann.org> wrote: Dear Colleagues, I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently. On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at:https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re... Summarised: The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving accountability, transparency, and effectiveness within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a community dialogue will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement. Key resolutions include: - Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. - Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. - Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews until the community dialogue informs next steps. - Considering future actions on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. - Planning a community dialogue on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. - Recognising contributions from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes. The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to collaborative review mechanisms that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent. Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite. This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007 The Board took this decision against ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003 So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned? The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws. The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4 - Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION - Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS - Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW - Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether. "Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened." The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018:https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi... Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by 20 December 2023. The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now 18 months late to start this. It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi). According to: Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies); The Board is acting against its own Bylaws. The ALAC should submit a Reconsideration Request without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws. A Community Reconsideration Request might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle. I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN... I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are Bylaw-mandated for a reason: in order to make sure that ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain open, fair, and aligned with the public interest. The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop. I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
+1 On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 11:21 AM Bill Jouris via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
In addition to the other recommendations here, let me add this. I think it might be worthwhile contacting the ICANN General Counsel regarding the conflict between the Board's decision and the By-laws.
Only recall the last time the California Attorney General found it necessary to initiate legal action (over the proposed .org transfer) against ICANN for failing to live up to its legal obligations. I doubt anyone is enthused about going thru that kind of thing again. But that's what the Board is setting us up for. Having their own lawyer point that out might help concentrate some minds.
Regards,
Bill Jouris
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 4:34 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote: Dear Colleagues,
I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently.
On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...
Summarised:
The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving *accountability, transparency, and effectiveness* within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a *community dialogue* will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement.
Key resolutions include:
- *Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program* (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. - *Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review* (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. - *Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews* until the community dialogue informs next steps. - *Considering future actions* on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. - *Planning a community dialogue* on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. - *Recognising contributions* from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes.
The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to *collaborative review mechanisms* that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent.
Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite.
This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007
The Board took this decision *against *ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003
So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned?
The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws.
The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4
- Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION - Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS - Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW - Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS
The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether.
"Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened."
The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi...
Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by *20 December 2023*.
The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now *18 months late* to start this.
It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi).
According to:
*Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);*
The Board is acting against its own Bylaws.
The ALAC should submit a *Reconsideration Request *without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws.
A *Community Reconsideration Request* might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle.
I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN...
I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are *Bylaw-mandated* for a reason: in order to make sure that *ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust*, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain *open, fair, and aligned with the public interest.*
The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop.
I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Not sure Bill, This was done with the inputs of legal. Don't forget that the ICANN General Counsel is also ICANN Board secretariat. All the best SeB Le 31/05/2025 à 17:21, Bill Jouris via ALAC a écrit :
Dear colleagues,
In addition to the other recommendations here, let me add this. I think it might be worthwhile contacting the ICANN General Counsel regarding the conflict between the Board's decision and the By-laws.
Only recall the last time the California Attorney General found it necessary to initiate legal action (over the proposed .org transfer) against ICANN for failing to live up to its legal obligations. I doubt anyone is enthused about going thru that kind of thing again. But that's what the Board is setting us up for. Having their own lawyer point that out might help concentrate some minds.
Regards,
Bill Jouris
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 4:34 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote: Dear Colleagues,
I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently.
On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re... <https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...>
Summarised:
The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving *accountability, transparency, and effectiveness* within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a *community dialogue* will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement.
Key resolutions include:
* *Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program* (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. * *Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review* (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. * *Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews* until the community dialogue informs next steps. * *Considering future actions* on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. * *Planning a community dialogue* on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. * *Recognising contributions* from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes.
The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to *collaborative review mechanisms* that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent.
Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite.
This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007 <https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007>
The Board took this decision *against *ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003 <https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003>
So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned?
The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws.
The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4 <https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4>
* Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION * Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS * Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW * Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS
The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether.
"Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened."
The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi... <https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi...>
Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by *20 December 2023*.
The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now *18 months late* to start this.
It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi).
According to:
/Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by:
(i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);/
The Board is acting against its own Bylaws.
The ALAC should submit a *Reconsideration Request *without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws.
A *Community Reconsideration Request* might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle.
I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en> ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN...
I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are *Bylaw-mandated* for a reason: in order to make sure that *ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust*, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain *open, fair, and aligned with the public interest.*
The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop.
I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list --alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email toalac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online:http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33
Hi Sebastian, It might come to nothing. On the other hand, it would appear to take minimal effort. And I can't see a downside to it. Bill Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 8:49 AM, SeB ICANN via ALAC<alac@icann.org> wrote: Not sure Bill, This was done with the inputs of legal. Don't forget that the ICANN General Counsel is also ICANN Board secretariat. All the best SeB Le 31/05/2025 à 17:21, Bill Jouris via ALAC a écrit : Dear colleagues, In addition to the other recommendations here, let me add this. I think it might be worthwhile contacting the ICANN General Counsel regarding the conflict between the Board's decision and the By-laws. Only recall the last time the California Attorney General found it necessary to initiate legal action (over the proposed .org transfer) against ICANN for failing to live up to its legal obligations. I doubt anyone is enthused about going thru that kind of thing again. But that's what the Board is setting us up for. Having their own lawyer point that out might help concentrate some minds. Regards, Bill Jouris Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 4:34 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote: Dear Colleagues, I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently. On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re... Summarised: The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving accountability, transparency, and effectiveness within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a community dialogue will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement. Key resolutions include: - Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. - Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. - Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews until the community dialogue informs next steps. - Considering future actions on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. - Planning a community dialogue on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. - Recognising contributions from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes. The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to collaborative review mechanisms that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent. Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite. This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007 The Board took this decision against ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003 So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned? The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws. The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4 - Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION - Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS - Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW - Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether. "Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened." The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi... Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by 20 December 2023. The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now 18 months late to start this. It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi). According to: Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies); The Board is acting against its own Bylaws. The ALAC should submit a Reconsideration Request without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws. A Community Reconsideration Request might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle. I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN... I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are Bylaw-mandated for a reason: in order to make sure that ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain open, fair, and aligned with the public interest. The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop. I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33 _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thanks to Olivier for initiating this great discussion. Time for action by the ALAC!! On Sat, 31 May 2025, 6:16 am Bill Jouris via ALAC, <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Sebastian,
It might come to nothing. On the other hand, it would appear to take minimal effort. And I can't see a downside to it.
Bill
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 8:49 AM, SeB ICANN via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Not sure Bill,
This was done with the inputs of legal. Don't forget that the ICANN General Counsel is also ICANN Board secretariat.
All the best SeB Le 31/05/2025 à 17:21, Bill Jouris via ALAC a écrit :
Dear colleagues,
In addition to the other recommendations here, let me add this. I think it might be worthwhile contacting the ICANN General Counsel regarding the conflict between the Board's decision and the By-laws.
Only recall the last time the California Attorney General found it necessary to initiate legal action (over the proposed .org transfer) against ICANN for failing to live up to its legal obligations. I doubt anyone is enthused about going thru that kind of thing again. But that's what the Board is setting us up for. Having their own lawyer point that out might help concentrate some minds.
Regards,
Bill Jouris
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 4:34 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> <alac@icann.org> wrote: Dear Colleagues,
I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently.
On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...
Summarised:
The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving *accountability, transparency, and effectiveness* within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a *community dialogue* will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement.
Key resolutions include:
- *Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program* (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. - *Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review* (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. - *Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews* until the community dialogue informs next steps. - *Considering future actions* on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. - *Planning a community dialogue* on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. - *Recognising contributions* from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes.
The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to *collaborative review mechanisms* that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent.
Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite.
This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007
The Board took this decision *against *ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003
So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned?
The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws.
The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4
- Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION - Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS - Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW - Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS
The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether.
"Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened."
The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi...
Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by *20 December 2023*.
The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now *18 months late* to start this.
It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi).
According to:
*Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);*
The Board is acting against its own Bylaws.
The ALAC should submit a *Reconsideration Request *without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws.
A *Community Reconsideration Request* might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle.
I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN...
I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are *Bylaw-mandated* for a reason: in order to make sure that *ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust*, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain *open, fair, and aligned with the public interest.*
The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop.
I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thanks Olivier, I have followed and expressed the same point of view each time it was possible. During the CIP-CCG meetings, during the PHR meetings and during the At-Large meetings where it was discussed. I also consider that the Board as changed PoV regarding various ATRT3 recommendations. The 18th months we spend to work seriously as a team for the 3rd ATR as end up as almost all the recommendations are now in the garbage. The way CIP is handle is not a bottom-up process as any review need to be conducted in ICANN. It is run by staff in a top down manner. The Holistic review was supposed to allow ICANN to have a broder view of the organization (the whole, not org). The last time it was done was in 2002. Now 23 years ago. Do you know any organization acting in each of its part without taking care of the relations of those partsand therefor not allowing a global (holistic) view. In addition ATRTs were set-up to be the review of the reviews. It is exactly what ATRT3 (and the previous ones) have done. Now the Board want to setup another mechanism. Forgetting ICANN Bylaws. 'Maybe we can start by writing 2 or 3 times the ROP and then do a pilot and if all is OK in 10 years we can change the bylaws to allow such mechanism' ;) It is time to get back to ATRT3 recommandations and to implement them urgently. And ATRT4 need to strate with no more delay. Thanks SeB Le 31/05/2025 à 13:34, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC a écrit :
Dear Colleagues,
I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently.
On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...
Summarised:
The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving *accountability, transparency, and effectiveness* within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a *community dialogue* will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement.
Key resolutions include:
* *Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program* (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. * *Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review* (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. * *Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews* until the community dialogue informs next steps. * *Considering future actions* on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. * *Planning a community dialogue* on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. * *Recognising contributions* from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes.
The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to *collaborative review mechanisms* that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent.
Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite.
This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007
The Board took this decision *against *ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003
So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned?
The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws.
The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4
* Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION * Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS * Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW * Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS
The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether.
"Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened."
The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi...
Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by *20 December 2023*.
The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now *18 months late* to start this.
It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi).
According to:
/Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by:
(i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);/
The Board is acting against its own Bylaws.
The ALAC should submit a *Reconsideration Request *without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws.
A *Community Reconsideration Request* might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle.
I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN...
I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are *Bylaw-mandated* for a reason: in order to make sure that *ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust*, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain *open, fair, and aligned with the public interest.*
The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop.
I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list --alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email toalac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online:http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33
When is the call on strategizing ? El sábado, 31 de mayo de 2025 09:47, SeB ICANN via ALAC <alac@icann.org> escribió:
Thanks Olivier, I have followed and expressed the same point of view each time it was possible. During the CIP-CCG meetings, during the PHR meetings and during the At-Large meetings where it was discussed. I also consider that the Board as changed PoV regarding various ATRT3 recommendations. The 18th months we spend to work seriously as a team for the 3rd ATR as end up as almost all the recommendations are now in the garbage. The way CIP is handle is not a bottom-up process as any review need to be conducted in ICANN. It is run by staff in a top down manner. The Holistic review was supposed to allow ICANN to have a broder view of the organization (the whole, not org). The last time it was done was in 2002. Now 23 years ago. Do you know any organization acting in each of its part without taking care of the relations of those partsand therefor not allowing a global (holistic) view. In addition ATRTs were set-up to be the review of the reviews. It is exactly what ATRT3 (and the previous ones) have done. Now the Board want to setup another mechanism. Forgetting ICANN Bylaws. 'Maybe we can start by writing 2 or 3 times the ROP and then do a pilot and if all is OK in 10 years we can change the bylaws to allow such mechanism' ;) It is time to get back to ATRT3 recommandations and to implement them urgently. And ATRT4 need to strate with no more delay. Thanks SeB Le 31/05/2025 à 13:34, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC a écrit :
Dear Colleagues, I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently. On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re... Summarised: The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, AND EFFECTIVENESS within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a COMMUNITY DIALOGUE will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement. Key resolutions include: * PROGRESSING THE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. * CONCLUDING THE PILOT HOLISTIC REVIEW (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. * DEFERRING ATRT4, SSR, AND RDS SPECIFIC REVIEWS until the community dialogue informs next steps. * CONSIDERING FUTURE ACTIONS on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. * PLANNING A COMMUNITY DIALOGUE on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. * RECOGNISING CONTRIBUTIONS from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes. The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to COLLABORATIVE REVIEW MECHANISMS that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent. Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite. This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007 The Board took this decision AGAINST ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003 So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned? The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws. The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4 * Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION * Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS * Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW * Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether. "Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened." The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi... Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by 20 DECEMBER 2023. The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now 18 MONTHS LATE to start this. It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi). According to: _Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by: (i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);_ The Board is acting against its own Bylaws. The ALAC should submit a RECONSIDERATION REQUEST without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws. A COMMUNITY RECONSIDERATION REQUEST might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle. I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN... I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are BYLAW-MANDATED for a reason: in order to make sure that ICANN REMAINS ACCOUNTABLE, TRANSPARENT, ENHANCING PUBLIC TRUST, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain OPEN, FAIR, AND ALIGNED WITH THE PUBLIC INTEREST. The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop. I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible. Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33 ------------------------- _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
In addition, Maybe you can be interested to read https://m17m.is/is-icann-giving-up-its-claim-to-bottom-up-multistakeholder-p... and to listen the recording https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-... And is also time to see how we evolved the agenda during ICANN83. Thanks SeB Le 31/05/2025 à 17:47, SeB ICANN a écrit :
Thanks Olivier, I have followed and expressed the same point of view each time it was possible. During the CIP-CCG meetings, during the PHR meetings and during the At-Large meetings where it was discussed.
I also consider that the Board as changed PoV regarding various ATRT3 recommendations. The 18th months we spend to work seriously as a team for the 3rd ATR as end up as almost all the recommendations are now in the garbage.
The way CIP is handle is not a bottom-up process as any review need to be conducted in ICANN. It is run by staff in a top down manner.
The Holistic review was supposed to allow ICANN to have a broder view of the organization (the whole, not org). The last time it was done was in 2002. Now 23 years ago. Do you know any organization acting in each of its part without taking care of the relations of those partsand therefor not allowing a global (holistic) view.
In addition ATRTs were set-up to be the review of the reviews. It is exactly what ATRT3 (and the previous ones) have done. Now the Board want to setup another mechanism. Forgetting ICANN Bylaws.
'Maybe we can start by writing 2 or 3 times the ROP and then do a pilot and if all is OK in 10 years we can change the bylaws to allow such mechanism' ;)
It is time to get back to ATRT3 recommandations and to implement them urgently.
And ATRT4 need to strate with no more delay.
Thanks SeB
Le 31/05/2025 à 13:34, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC a écrit :
Dear Colleagues,
I don't often write to the ALAC mailing list as I mostly observe what's going on here, but seeing what seems to be no action on a Core Accountability measure of ICANN being simply cast aside, and with possibly only three days to go, with neither action on the OFB working group, or the ALAC mailing list, it is time for me to point something out urgently.
On 19 May 2025, the ICANN Board held a special meeting in which it passed Resolutions 2025.05.19.01 – 2025.05.19.06. These can be read at: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...
Summarised:
The ICANN Board has directed its President and CEO to design a review program aimed at improving *accountability, transparency, and effectiveness* within ICANN, with an emphasis on community-led processes. To achieve this, a *community dialogue* will be initiated to identify key areas for improvement.
Key resolutions include:
* *Progressing the Continuous Improvement Program* (CIP) while deferring Organisational Reviews until the first cycle is complete. * *Concluding the Pilot Holistic Review* (PHR), allowing ongoing work within SOs and ACs on continuous improvement. * *Deferring ATRT4, SSR, and RDS Specific Reviews* until the community dialogue informs next steps. * *Considering future actions* on Organisational Reviews after one CIP cycle. * *Planning a community dialogue* on ICANN Reviews, incorporating input from the ICANN84 Public Meeting. * *Recognising contributions* from the PHR Team and the broader ICANN community in shaping review processes.
The rationale says that the Board's decisions reflect a commitment to *collaborative review mechanisms* that ensure ICANN remains effective and transparent.
Unfortunately, in practice, the resolution that the Board has passed is likely to foster exactly the opposite.
This decision was transmitted to SO/AC Chairs and can be read at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14007
The Board took this decision *against *ALAC Advice provided at: https://atlarge.icann.org/en/advice_statements/14003
So what are we to do, as an Advisory Committee, besides being shocked and stunned?
The ICANN Board has a duty to act according to the ICANN Bylaws.
The ICANN Bylaws mandate Periodic Review Mechanisms and also mandate Reconsideration Requests as part of Article IV of its Bylaws published on https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#article4
* Section 4.2. RECONSIDERATION * Section 4.4. PERIODIC REVIEW OF ICANN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS * Section 4.5. ANNUAL REVIEW * Section 4.6. SPECIFIC REVIEWS
The periodicity of Reviews is mandated in order to avoid situations where reviews would be stopped altogether.
"Section 4.6 (b) (vi) The Accountability and Transparency Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened."
The last Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) was appointed on 20 December 2018: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/members-announced-for-the-thi...
Thus the next ATRT should have been appointed by "no less frequently than every five years" thus by *20 December 2023*.
The Board at the time decided to delay the start of ATRT4. We are now *18 months late* to start this.
It is now continuing to extend the delay to the start of ATRT4, thus contravening Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi).
According to:
/Section 4.2 (c) A Requestor may submit a request for reconsideration or review of an ICANN action or inaction ("Reconsideration Request") to the extent that the Requestor has been adversely affected by:
(i) One or more Board or Staff actions or inactions that contradict ICANN's Mission, Commitments, Core Values and/or established ICANN policy(ies);/
The Board is acting against its own Bylaws.
The ALAC should submit a *Reconsideration Request *without further delay, based on the fact that the Board is now acting against its own Bylaws.
A *Community Reconsideration Request* might have even more weight, but we have to be quite lucid about the fact that some other SOs/ACs/SGs, such as the Country Code Name Supporting Organisation (ccNSO) and the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) would oppose such Community Reconsideration as they have expressed their support for interrupting the review cycle.
I have marked this message as "URGENT" because whilst the Bylaws mention a 30 day period for Reconsideration Requests, the Web Page explaining the reconsideration process ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/mechanisms-2014-03-20-en ) mentions only 15 days - obviously an error somewhere, but you never know, with ICANN...
I'll remind everyone: whilst Bylaw-mandated Reviews might be tedious, repetitive and introduce a large workload on the Community, they are *Bylaw-mandated* for a reason: in order to make sure that *ICANN remains Accountable, Transparent, enhancing Public Trust*, and to ensure its decision-making processes remain *open, fair, and aligned with the public interest.*
The reason given in relation to delaying ATRT4 is that ICANN Org is struggling to implement all of the recommendations made in past reviews, and ATRT3 in particular. This failure of ICANN Org to implement recommendations is unacceptable. It is about time that the ALAC calls this out. It used to be the US Department of Commerce (DoC) that used to do this and bang on the table. Unfortunately we now are reaching a level of complacency that is contravening ICANN's own Bylaws and this has to stop.
I trust that you, the ALAC acting in the best interests of Internet users worldwide, will support filing a Reconsideration Request as soon as possible.
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond (writing in my own personal capacity)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list --alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email toalac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online:http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33
-- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33
On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote:
and to listen the recording https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-...
If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards, Olivier
Dear Olivier and colleagues, Thank you for your thoughtful and urgent message highlighting the troubling developments regarding the deferral of ATRT4 and broader accountability issues at ICANN. As someone who served on the ATRT3 team and contributed directly to the recommendations, I share your concern that the Board’s recent decision appears to disregard both the Bylaw requirements and the principles of continuous accountability and transparency that the ATRT process is designed to uphold. During ATRT3, we made significant efforts to ensure that our recommendations would strengthen ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and foster community trust in the multi-stakeholder model. It is disheartening to see that, rather than advancing the review cycle in line with Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi), the Board has chosen to defer ATRT4 indefinitely. This not only contravenes the letter of the Bylaws but also undermines the very purpose of these periodic reviews—to prevent the erosion of community accountability and trust. I agree with you that the ALAC has a duty to act firmly in the face of these developments. Filing a Reconsideration Request is a legitimate step, as the Board’s inaction on ATRT4 has direct and adverse effects on the effectiveness of the ICANN review process and the community’s ability to hold ICANN accountable. Given the role of ATRT3 in shaping the continuous improvement framework and our collective efforts to provide recommendations that would be both actionable and meaningful, I believe it is essential for the ALAC to assert its mandate and push back against this apparent sidelining of community reviews. I fully support the call for the ALAC to initiate a Reconsideration Request promptly and to engage with other supportive stakeholders to ensure that ICANN’s accountability and transparency commitments remain robust and in line with its Bylaws. Thank you again for bringing this to our attention with such clarity and urgency. Best regards, Daniel K. Nanghaka ᐧ On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC < alac@icann.org> wrote:
On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote:
and to listen the recording
https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-...
If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards,
Olivier _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Olivier and colleagues, Following up on the important concerns raised in Olivier’s initial email and my earlier response, I’d like to propose a concrete next step to ensure that we act decisively in response to the ICANN Board’s deferral of ATRT4. Also note that I have written a draft Reconsideration Request which can be picked up by the ALAC - as a member of the ATRT3 team, I believe that the most effective way to address this matter would be to form a small, focused drafting team. This team would include: • ATRT3 implementation shepherds, who have deep familiarity with the recommendations and accountability processes; and • Select ALAC members, who can ensure that the voice of Internet end-users is front and center in this effort. The drafting team would focus on: 1. Preparing a Reconsideration Request to the ICANN Board that outlines the Board’s violation of Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi) and related provisions; 2. Clearly articulating the adverse impacts of this ongoing delay on ICANN’s accountability and transparency; and 3. Filing the Request within the necessary timeframe to ensure our concerns are formally documented and considered. Given the urgency, I suggest that we finalize the composition of this drafting team as soon as possible and convene an initial meeting to begin outlining the Request as attached in the draft attached Please share your thoughts on this approach and, if you’re interested in participating directly. I am confident that a coordinated effort will send a strong message and help protect the accountability mechanisms we worked so hard to strengthen. Looking forward to your feedback and support. Warm regards, Daniel K. Nanghaka ATRT3 Member and Implementation Shepherd ᐧ On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 21:49, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Olivier and colleagues,
Thank you for your thoughtful and urgent message highlighting the troubling developments regarding the deferral of ATRT4 and broader accountability issues at ICANN.
As someone who served on the ATRT3 team and contributed directly to the recommendations, I share your concern that the Board’s recent decision appears to disregard both the Bylaw requirements and the principles of continuous accountability and transparency that the ATRT process is designed to uphold.
During ATRT3, we made significant efforts to ensure that our recommendations would strengthen ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and foster community trust in the multi-stakeholder model. It is disheartening to see that, rather than advancing the review cycle in line with Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi), the Board has chosen to defer ATRT4 indefinitely. This not only contravenes the letter of the Bylaws but also undermines the very purpose of these periodic reviews—to prevent the erosion of community accountability and trust.
I agree with you that the ALAC has a duty to act firmly in the face of these developments. Filing a Reconsideration Request is a legitimate step, as the Board’s inaction on ATRT4 has direct and adverse effects on the effectiveness of the ICANN review process and the community’s ability to hold ICANN accountable.
Given the role of ATRT3 in shaping the continuous improvement framework and our collective efforts to provide recommendations that would be both actionable and meaningful, I believe it is essential for the ALAC to assert its mandate and push back against this apparent sidelining of community reviews.
I fully support the call for the ALAC to initiate a Reconsideration Request promptly and to engage with other supportive stakeholders to ensure that ICANN’s accountability and transparency commitments remain robust and in line with its Bylaws.
Thank you again for bringing this to our attention with such clarity and urgency.
Best regards,
Daniel K. Nanghaka ᐧ
On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC < alac@icann.org> wrote:
On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote:
and to listen the recording
https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-...
If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards,
Olivier _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Daniel, thanks for this excellent draft! Now on a Google Doc for all to comment on ASAP: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hXMz9kAEx73SsPDjZPWCct6mlc0TYLsu/edit?us... Kindest regards, Olivier On 31/05/2025 20:05, DANIEL NANGHAKA wrote:
Dear Olivier and colleagues,
Following up on the important concerns raised in Olivier’s initial email and my earlier response, I’d like to propose a concrete next step to ensure that we act decisively in response to the ICANN Board’s deferral of ATRT4. Also note that I have written a draft Reconsideration Request which can be picked up by the ALAC - as a member of the ATRT3 team, I believe that the most effective way to address this matter would be to form a small, focused drafting team. This team would include: • ATRT3 implementation shepherds, who have deep familiarity with the recommendations and accountability processes; and • Select ALAC members, who can ensure that the voice of Internet end-users is front and center in this effort.
The drafting team would focus on:
1. Preparing a Reconsideration Request to the ICANN Board that outlines the Board’s violation of Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi) and related provisions; 2. Clearly articulating the adverse impacts of this ongoing delay on ICANN’s accountability and transparency; and 3. Filing the Request within the necessary timeframe to ensure our concerns are formally documented and considered.
Given the urgency, I suggest that we finalize the composition of this drafting team as soon as possible and convene an initial meeting to begin outlining the Request as attached in the draft attached
Please share your thoughts on this approach and, if you’re interested in participating directly. I am confident that a coordinated effort will send a strong message and help protect the accountability mechanisms we worked so hard to strengthen.
Looking forward to your feedback and support.
Warm regards,
Daniel K. Nanghaka ATRT3 Member and Implementation Shepherd ᐧ
On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 21:49, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Olivier and colleagues,
Thank you for your thoughtful and urgent message highlighting the troubling developments regarding the deferral of ATRT4 and broader accountability issues at ICANN.
As someone who served on the ATRT3 team and contributed directly to the recommendations, I share your concern that the Board’s recent decision appears to disregard both the Bylaw requirements and the principles of continuous accountability and transparency that the ATRT process is designed to uphold.
During ATRT3, we made significant efforts to ensure that our recommendations would strengthen ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and foster community trust in the multi-stakeholder model. It is disheartening to see that, rather than advancing the review cycle in line with Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi), the Board has chosen to defer ATRT4 indefinitely. This not only contravenes the letter of the Bylaws but also undermines the very purpose of these periodic reviews—to prevent the erosion of community accountability and trust.
I agree with you that the ALAC has a duty to act firmly in the face of these developments. Filing a Reconsideration Request is a legitimate step, as the Board’s inaction on ATRT4 has direct and adverse effects on the effectiveness of the ICANN review process and the community’s ability to hold ICANN accountable.
Given the role of ATRT3 in shaping the continuous improvement framework and our collective efforts to provide recommendations that would be both actionable and meaningful, I believe it is essential for the ALAC to assert its mandate and push back against this apparent sidelining of community reviews.
I fully support the call for the ALAC to initiate a Reconsideration Request promptly and to engage with other supportive stakeholders to ensure that ICANN’s accountability and transparency commitments remain robust and in line with its Bylaws.
Thank you again for bringing this to our attention with such clarity and urgency.
Best regards,
Daniel K. Nanghaka ᐧ
On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote:
and to listen the recording https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-...
If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai <http://otter.ai> and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards,
Olivier _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Congratulations, Daniel! I'm not currently a member of ALAC, but I still want to express my support for Daniel's proposal. Short, concise, and well-founded. Best regards Alberto De: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> Enviado el: domingo, 1 de junio de 2025 13:56 Para: DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> CC: alac@icann.org Asunto: [ALAC] Re: URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path Dear Daniel, thanks for this excellent draft! Now on a Google Doc for all to comment on ASAP: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hXMz9kAEx73SsPDjZPWCct6mlc0TYLsu/edit?us... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hXMz9kAEx73SsPDjZPWCct6mlc0TYLsu/edit?us...> &ouid=110446642724802872580&rtpof=true&sd=true Kindest regards, Olivier On 31/05/2025 20:05, DANIEL NANGHAKA wrote: Dear Olivier and colleagues, Following up on the important concerns raised in Olivier’s initial email and my earlier response, I’d like to propose a concrete next step to ensure that we act decisively in response to the ICANN Board’s deferral of ATRT4. Also note that I have written a draft Reconsideration Request which can be picked up by the ALAC - as a member of the ATRT3 team, I believe that the most effective way to address this matter would be to form a small, focused drafting team. This team would include: • ATRT3 implementation shepherds, who have deep familiarity with the recommendations and accountability processes; and • Select ALAC members, who can ensure that the voice of Internet end-users is front and center in this effort. The drafting team would focus on: 1. Preparing a Reconsideration Request to the ICANN Board that outlines the Board’s violation of Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi) and related provisions; 2. Clearly articulating the adverse impacts of this ongoing delay on ICANN’s accountability and transparency; and 3. Filing the Request within the necessary timeframe to ensure our concerns are formally documented and considered. Given the urgency, I suggest that we finalize the composition of this drafting team as soon as possible and convene an initial meeting to begin outlining the Request as attached in the draft attached Please share your thoughts on this approach and, if you’re interested in participating directly. I am confident that a coordinated effort will send a strong message and help protect the accountability mechanisms we worked so hard to strengthen. Looking forward to your feedback and support. Warm regards, Daniel K. Nanghaka ATRT3 Member and Implementation Shepherd <https://mailfoogae.appspot.com/t?sender=aZG5kYW5uYW5nQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D&ty...> ᐧ On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 21:49, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com <mailto:dndannang@gmail.com> > wrote: Dear Olivier and colleagues, Thank you for your thoughtful and urgent message highlighting the troubling developments regarding the deferral of ATRT4 and broader accountability issues at ICANN. As someone who served on the ATRT3 team and contributed directly to the recommendations, I share your concern that the Board’s recent decision appears to disregard both the Bylaw requirements and the principles of continuous accountability and transparency that the ATRT process is designed to uphold. During ATRT3, we made significant efforts to ensure that our recommendations would strengthen ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and foster community trust in the multi-stakeholder model. It is disheartening to see that, rather than advancing the review cycle in line with Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi), the Board has chosen to defer ATRT4 indefinitely. This not only contravenes the letter of the Bylaws but also undermines the very purpose of these periodic reviews—to prevent the erosion of community accountability and trust. I agree with you that the ALAC has a duty to act firmly in the face of these developments. Filing a Reconsideration Request is a legitimate step, as the Board’s inaction on ATRT4 has direct and adverse effects on the effectiveness of the ICANN review process and the community’s ability to hold ICANN accountable. Given the role of ATRT3 in shaping the continuous improvement framework and our collective efforts to provide recommendations that would be both actionable and meaningful, I believe it is essential for the ALAC to assert its mandate and push back against this apparent sidelining of community reviews. I fully support the call for the ALAC to initiate a Reconsideration Request promptly and to engage with other supportive stakeholders to ensure that ICANN’s accountability and transparency commitments remain robust and in line with its Bylaws. Thank you again for bringing this to our attention with such clarity and urgency. Best regards, Daniel K. Nanghaka <https://mailfoogae.appspot.com/t?sender=aZG5kYW5uYW5nQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D&ty...> ᐧ On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org <mailto:alac@icann.org> > wrote: On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote: and to listen the recording https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-... If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai <http://otter.ai> and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards, Olivier _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org <mailto:alac@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org <mailto:alac-leave@icann.org> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Apoyo totalmente la propuesta de Daniel oportuno para el trabajo colaborativo de todos. El dom, 1 de jun de 2025, 11:13 a. m., Alberto Soto via ALAC <alac@icann.org> escribió:
Congratulations, Daniel! I'm not currently a member of ALAC, but I still want to express my support for Daniel's proposal. Short, concise, and well-founded.
Best regards
Alberto
*De:* Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> *Enviado el:* domingo, 1 de junio de 2025 13:56 *Para:* DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> *CC:* alac@icann.org *Asunto:* [ALAC] Re: URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path
Dear Daniel,
thanks for this excellent draft! Now on a Google Doc for all to comment on ASAP:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hXMz9kAEx73SsPDjZPWCct6mlc0TYLsu/edit?us...
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 31/05/2025 20:05, DANIEL NANGHAKA wrote:
Dear Olivier and colleagues,
Following up on the important concerns raised in Olivier’s initial email and my earlier response, I’d like to propose a concrete next step to ensure that we act decisively in response to the ICANN Board’s deferral of ATRT4.
Also note that I have written a draft Reconsideration Request which can be picked up by the ALAC - as a member of the ATRT3 team, I believe that the most effective way to address this matter would be to form a small, focused drafting team. This team would include: • ATRT3 implementation shepherds, who have deep familiarity with the recommendations and accountability processes; and • Select ALAC members, who can ensure that the voice of Internet end-users is front and center in this effort.
The drafting team would focus on:
1. Preparing a Reconsideration Request to the ICANN Board that outlines the Board’s violation of Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi) and related provisions; 2. Clearly articulating the adverse impacts of this ongoing delay on ICANN’s accountability and transparency; and 3. Filing the Request within the necessary timeframe to ensure our concerns are formally documented and considered.
Given the urgency, I suggest that we finalize the composition of this drafting team as soon as possible and convene an initial meeting to begin outlining the Request as attached in the draft attached
Please share your thoughts on this approach and, if you’re interested in participating directly. I am confident that a coordinated effort will send a strong message and help protect the accountability mechanisms we worked so hard to strengthen.
Looking forward to your feedback and support.
Warm regards,
Daniel K. Nanghaka
ATRT3 Member and Implementation Shepherd
ᐧ
On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 21:49, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Olivier and colleagues,
Thank you for your thoughtful and urgent message highlighting the troubling developments regarding the deferral of ATRT4 and broader accountability issues at ICANN.
As someone who served on the ATRT3 team and contributed directly to the recommendations, I share your concern that the Board’s recent decision appears to disregard both the Bylaw requirements and the principles of continuous accountability and transparency that the ATRT process is designed to uphold.
During ATRT3, we made significant efforts to ensure that our recommendations would strengthen ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and foster community trust in the multi-stakeholder model. It is disheartening to see that, rather than advancing the review cycle in line with Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi), the Board has chosen to defer ATRT4 indefinitely. This not only contravenes the letter of the Bylaws but also undermines the very purpose of these periodic reviews—to prevent the erosion of community accountability and trust.
I agree with you that the ALAC has a duty to act firmly in the face of these developments. Filing a Reconsideration Request is a legitimate step, as the Board’s inaction on ATRT4 has direct and adverse effects on the effectiveness of the ICANN review process and the community’s ability to hold ICANN accountable.
Given the role of ATRT3 in shaping the continuous improvement framework and our collective efforts to provide recommendations that would be both actionable and meaningful, I believe it is essential for the ALAC to assert its mandate and push back against this apparent sidelining of community reviews.
I fully support the call for the ALAC to initiate a Reconsideration Request promptly and to engage with other supportive stakeholders to ensure that ICANN’s accountability and transparency commitments remain robust and in line with its Bylaws.
Thank you again for bringing this to our attention with such clarity and urgency.
Best regards,
Daniel K. Nanghaka
ᐧ
On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC < alac@icann.org> wrote:
On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote:
and to listen the recording
https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-...
If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards,
Olivier
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Folks, The ALT have been discussing this issue ane following this thread. We’ve been doing the research on the possible ways to follow up on the Board’s action and have concluded that we should convert our correspondence (it wasn’t advice) to advice and initiate an RIR, as suggested on this thread. We can then look for sponsors to convert the RIR request to a community request which does not require the whole community. We have already redrafted the RIR, created by Daniel, and will circulate it shortly, after a final read through by the ALT. Please hold off on commenting until we circulate that draft. Thank you. Jonathan From: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> Date: Sunday, June 1, 2025 at 12:56 PM To: DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> Cc: alac@icann.org <alac@icann.org> Subject: [ALAC] Re: URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path Dear Daniel, thanks for this excellent draft! Now on a Google Doc for all to comment on ASAP: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hXMz9kAEx73SsPDjZPWCct6mlc0TYLsu/edit?us... Kindest regards, Olivier On 31/05/2025 20:05, DANIEL NANGHAKA wrote: Dear Olivier and colleagues, Following up on the important concerns raised in Olivier’s initial email and my earlier response, I’d like to propose a concrete next step to ensure that we act decisively in response to the ICANN Board’s deferral of ATRT4. Also note that I have written a draft Reconsideration Request which can be picked up by the ALAC - as a member of the ATRT3 team, I believe that the most effective way to address this matter would be to form a small, focused drafting team. This team would include: • ATRT3 implementation shepherds, who have deep familiarity with the recommendations and accountability processes; and • Select ALAC members, who can ensure that the voice of Internet end-users is front and center in this effort. The drafting team would focus on: 1. Preparing a Reconsideration Request to the ICANN Board that outlines the Board’s violation of Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi) and related provisions; 2. Clearly articulating the adverse impacts of this ongoing delay on ICANN’s accountability and transparency; and 3. Filing the Request within the necessary timeframe to ensure our concerns are formally documented and considered. Given the urgency, I suggest that we finalize the composition of this drafting team as soon as possible and convene an initial meeting to begin outlining the Request as attached in the draft attached Please share your thoughts on this approach and, if you’re interested in participating directly. I am confident that a coordinated effort will send a strong message and help protect the accountability mechanisms we worked so hard to strengthen. Looking forward to your feedback and support. Warm regards, Daniel K. Nanghaka ATRT3 Member and Implementation Shepherd [Image removed by sender.]ᐧ On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 21:49, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com<mailto:dndannang@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Olivier and colleagues, Thank you for your thoughtful and urgent message highlighting the troubling developments regarding the deferral of ATRT4 and broader accountability issues at ICANN. As someone who served on the ATRT3 team and contributed directly to the recommendations, I share your concern that the Board’s recent decision appears to disregard both the Bylaw requirements and the principles of continuous accountability and transparency that the ATRT process is designed to uphold. During ATRT3, we made significant efforts to ensure that our recommendations would strengthen ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and foster community trust in the multi-stakeholder model. It is disheartening to see that, rather than advancing the review cycle in line with Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi), the Board has chosen to defer ATRT4 indefinitely. This not only contravenes the letter of the Bylaws but also undermines the very purpose of these periodic reviews—to prevent the erosion of community accountability and trust. I agree with you that the ALAC has a duty to act firmly in the face of these developments. Filing a Reconsideration Request is a legitimate step, as the Board’s inaction on ATRT4 has direct and adverse effects on the effectiveness of the ICANN review process and the community’s ability to hold ICANN accountable. Given the role of ATRT3 in shaping the continuous improvement framework and our collective efforts to provide recommendations that would be both actionable and meaningful, I believe it is essential for the ALAC to assert its mandate and push back against this apparent sidelining of community reviews. I fully support the call for the ALAC to initiate a Reconsideration Request promptly and to engage with other supportive stakeholders to ensure that ICANN’s accountability and transparency commitments remain robust and in line with its Bylaws. Thank you again for bringing this to our attention with such clarity and urgency. Best regards, Daniel K. Nanghaka [Image removed by sender.]ᐧ On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org<mailto:alac@icann.org>> wrote: On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote: and to listen the recording https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-... If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai<http://otter.ai> and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards, Olivier _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org<mailto:alac@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org<mailto:alac-leave@icann.org> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Sorry, RFR. It’s Sunday, I need a nap! From: Jonathan Zuck via ALAC <alac@icann.org> Date: Sunday, June 1, 2025 at 1:16 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> Cc: alac@icann.org <alac@icann.org> Subject: [ALAC] Re: URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path Folks, The ALT have been discussing this issue ane following this thread. We’ve been doing the research on the possible ways to follow up on the Board’s action and have concluded that we should convert our correspondence (it wasn’t advice) to advice and initiate an RIR, as suggested on this thread. We can then look for sponsors to convert the RIR request to a community request which does not require the whole community. We have already redrafted the RIR, created by Daniel, and will circulate it shortly, after a final read through by the ALT. Please hold off on commenting until we circulate that draft. Thank you. Jonathan From: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> Date: Sunday, June 1, 2025 at 12:56 PM To: DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> Cc: alac@icann.org <alac@icann.org> Subject: [ALAC] Re: URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path Dear Daniel, thanks for this excellent draft! Now on a Google Doc for all to comment on ASAP: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hXMz9kAEx73SsPDjZPWCct6mlc0TYLsu/edit?us... Kindest regards, Olivier On 31/05/2025 20:05, DANIEL NANGHAKA wrote: Dear Olivier and colleagues, Following up on the important concerns raised in Olivier’s initial email and my earlier response, I’d like to propose a concrete next step to ensure that we act decisively in response to the ICANN Board’s deferral of ATRT4. Also note that I have written a draft Reconsideration Request which can be picked up by the ALAC - as a member of the ATRT3 team, I believe that the most effective way to address this matter would be to form a small, focused drafting team. This team would include: • ATRT3 implementation shepherds, who have deep familiarity with the recommendations and accountability processes; and • Select ALAC members, who can ensure that the voice of Internet end-users is front and center in this effort. The drafting team would focus on: 1. Preparing a Reconsideration Request to the ICANN Board that outlines the Board’s violation of Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi) and related provisions; 2. Clearly articulating the adverse impacts of this ongoing delay on ICANN’s accountability and transparency; and 3. Filing the Request within the necessary timeframe to ensure our concerns are formally documented and considered. Given the urgency, I suggest that we finalize the composition of this drafting team as soon as possible and convene an initial meeting to begin outlining the Request as attached in the draft attached Please share your thoughts on this approach and, if you’re interested in participating directly. I am confident that a coordinated effort will send a strong message and help protect the accountability mechanisms we worked so hard to strengthen. Looking forward to your feedback and support. Warm regards, Daniel K. Nanghaka ATRT3 Member and Implementation Shepherd [Image removed by sender.]ᐧ On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 21:49, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com<mailto:dndannang@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Olivier and colleagues, Thank you for your thoughtful and urgent message highlighting the troubling developments regarding the deferral of ATRT4 and broader accountability issues at ICANN. As someone who served on the ATRT3 team and contributed directly to the recommendations, I share your concern that the Board’s recent decision appears to disregard both the Bylaw requirements and the principles of continuous accountability and transparency that the ATRT process is designed to uphold. During ATRT3, we made significant efforts to ensure that our recommendations would strengthen ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and foster community trust in the multi-stakeholder model. It is disheartening to see that, rather than advancing the review cycle in line with Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi), the Board has chosen to defer ATRT4 indefinitely. This not only contravenes the letter of the Bylaws but also undermines the very purpose of these periodic reviews—to prevent the erosion of community accountability and trust. I agree with you that the ALAC has a duty to act firmly in the face of these developments. Filing a Reconsideration Request is a legitimate step, as the Board’s inaction on ATRT4 has direct and adverse effects on the effectiveness of the ICANN review process and the community’s ability to hold ICANN accountable. Given the role of ATRT3 in shaping the continuous improvement framework and our collective efforts to provide recommendations that would be both actionable and meaningful, I believe it is essential for the ALAC to assert its mandate and push back against this apparent sidelining of community reviews. I fully support the call for the ALAC to initiate a Reconsideration Request promptly and to engage with other supportive stakeholders to ensure that ICANN’s accountability and transparency commitments remain robust and in line with its Bylaws. Thank you again for bringing this to our attention with such clarity and urgency. Best regards, Daniel K. Nanghaka [Image removed by sender.]ᐧ On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org<mailto:alac@icann.org>> wrote: On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote: and to listen the recording https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-... If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai<http://otter.ai> and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards, Olivier _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org<mailto:alac@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org<mailto:alac-leave@icann.org> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you very much for your update, Jonathan. This looks like an excellent plan. Looking forward to seeing the proposed text circulated ASAP. Kindest regards, Olivier On 01/06/2025 18:37, Jonathan Zuck wrote:
Sorry, RFR. It’s Sunday, I need a nap!
*From: *Jonathan Zuck via ALAC <alac@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, June 1, 2025 at 1:16 PM *To: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> *Cc: *alac@icann.org <alac@icann.org> *Subject: *[ALAC] Re: URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path
Folks,
The ALT have been discussing this issue ane following this thread. We’ve been doing the research on the possible ways to follow up on the Board’s action and have concluded that we should convert our correspondence (it wasn’t advice) to advice and initiate an RIR, as suggested on this thread. We can then look for sponsors to convert the RIR request to a community request which does not require the whole community.
We have already redrafted the RIR, created by Daniel, and will circulate it shortly, after a final read through by the ALT. Please hold off on commenting until we circulate that draft. Thank you.
Jonathan
*From: *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> *Date: *Sunday, June 1, 2025 at 12:56 PM *To: *DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> *Cc: *alac@icann.org <alac@icann.org> *Subject: *[ALAC] Re: URGENT: Approved Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 19 May 2025 // ICANN Reviews Program Path
Dear Daniel,
thanks for this excellent draft! Now on a Google Doc for all to comment on ASAP:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hXMz9kAEx73SsPDjZPWCct6mlc0TYLsu/edit?us... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hXMz9kAEx73SsPDjZPWCct6mlc0TYLsu/edit?us...>
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 31/05/2025 20:05, DANIEL NANGHAKA wrote:
Dear Olivier and colleagues,
Following up on the important concerns raised in Olivier’s initial email and my earlier response, I’d like to propose a concrete next step to ensure that we act decisively in response to the ICANN Board’s deferral of ATRT4.
Also note that I have written a draft Reconsideration Request which can be picked up by the ALAC - as a member of the ATRT3 team, I believe that the most effective way to address this matter would be to form a small, focused drafting team. This team would include: • ATRT3 implementation shepherds, who have deep familiarity with the recommendations and accountability processes; and • Select ALAC members, who can ensure that the voice of Internet end-users is front and center in this effort.
The drafting team would focus on:
1. Preparing a Reconsideration Request to the ICANN Board that outlines the Board’s violation of Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi) and related provisions; 2. Clearly articulating the adverse impacts of this ongoing delay on ICANN’s accountability and transparency; and 3. Filing the Request within the necessary timeframe to ensure our concerns are formally documented and considered.
Given the urgency, I suggest that we finalize the composition of this drafting team as soon as possible and convene an initial meeting to begin outlining the Request as attached in the draft attached
Please share your thoughts on this approach and, if you’re interested in participating directly. I am confident that a coordinated effort will send a strong message and help protect the accountability mechanisms we worked so hard to strengthen.
Looking forward to your feedback and support.
Warm regards,
Daniel K. Nanghaka
ATRT3 Member and Implementation Shepherd
Image removed by sender.ᐧ
On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 21:49, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Olivier and colleagues,
Thank you for your thoughtful and urgent message highlighting the troubling developments regarding the deferral of ATRT4 and broader accountability issues at ICANN.
As someone who served on the ATRT3 team and contributed directly to the recommendations, I share your concern that the Board’s recent decision appears to disregard both the Bylaw requirements and the principles of continuous accountability and transparency that the ATRT process is designed to uphold.
During ATRT3, we made significant efforts to ensure that our recommendations would strengthen ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and foster community trust in the multi-stakeholder model. It is disheartening to see that, rather than advancing the review cycle in line with Bylaw Section 4.6 (b) (vi), the Board has chosen to defer ATRT4 indefinitely. This not only contravenes the letter of the Bylaws but also undermines the very purpose of these periodic reviews—to prevent the erosion of community accountability and trust.
I agree with you that the ALAC has a duty to act firmly in the face of these developments. Filing a Reconsideration Request is a legitimate step, as the Board’s inaction on ATRT4 has direct and adverse effects on the effectiveness of the ICANN review process and the community’s ability to hold ICANN accountable.
Given the role of ATRT3 in shaping the continuous improvement framework and our collective efforts to provide recommendations that would be both actionable and meaningful, I believe it is essential for the ALAC to assert its mandate and push back against this apparent sidelining of community reviews.
I fully support the call for the ALAC to initiate a Reconsideration Request promptly and to engage with other supportive stakeholders to ensure that ICANN’s accountability and transparency commitments remain robust and in line with its Bylaws.
Thank you again for bringing this to our attention with such clarity and urgency.
Best regards,
Daniel K. Nanghaka
Image removed by sender.ᐧ
On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
On 31/05/2025 17:00, SeB ICANN via ALAC wrote:
and to listen the recording https://icann83.sched.com/event/23LLY/icann-board-engagement-with-the-icann-...
If you do not have the time to listen to the whole hour, I have passed the recording through otter.ai <http://otter.ai> and have produced the attached transcript. Warning: the transcript will have errors inside it, both when it comes to names of participants and the transcript itself. The AI summary will also contain errors, but this file is shared to give you a general idea of the call. If you want the verified information, listen to the whole transcript. Kindest regards,
Olivier
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (12)
-
alberto＠soto.net.ar -
Bill Jouris -
Carlos Raúl Gutiérreaz -
DANIEL NANGHAKA -
Humberto Carrasco -
Javier Rua -
Jonathan Zuck -
Maureen Hilyard -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond -
Pari Esfandiari -
Sandra Rodriguez -
SeB ICANN