Seems to me that if there’s already a group of SO/AC reps familiar with all of these issues via the IRP-IOT then that seems logical to use that group rather than convene a totally new one. But that work predates my time on council or within ICANN policy work and so I am probably one of the least expert voices around the table! From: Ccnso-council <ccnso-council-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Katrina Sataki Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 5:58 PM To: ccNSO-Council@icann.org Subject: [ccnso-council] Next Steps in Assisting Community Work — Selection Process for Bylaws IRP Standing Panel Dear Colleagues, What is your opinion on the selection process for the IRP Standing Panel (see questions below)? The issue is important for ccTLDs because, although the disputes exclude “Claims relating to ccTLD delegations and re-delegations”, they cover, e.g. “[disputes that] arose from claims involving rights of the EC as set forth in the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws”, “Claims that ICANN, the Board, individual Directors, Officers or Staff members have not enforced ICANN's contractual rights with respect to the IANA Naming Function Contract” or “Claims regarding PTI service complaints by direct customers of the IANA naming functions that are not resolved through mediation”. Some time ago we submitted a statement (see attachment). Currently, there are no ccTLD people on the IRP Implementation Oversight team (IRP-IOT). If I remember correctly, when we issued a call for volunteers to help repopulate IRP-IOT, there was no interest to participate in this work. Please let me know your thoughts! Thank you! Kind regards, ]{atrina From: David Olive <david.olive@icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org>> Date: Saturday, 16 May 2020 at 18:00 To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv<mailto:katrina@nic.lv>>, "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>, Aftab Siddiqui <aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com<mailto:aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com>>, Fred Baker <fred@isc.org<mailto:fred@isc.org>>, "manal@tra.gov.eg<mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg>" <manal@tra.gov.eg<mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg>>, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard@gmail.com>>, Rod Rasmussen <rod@rodrasmussen.com<mailto:rod@rodrasmussen.com>>, "oscar@lacnic.net<mailto:oscar@lacnic.net>" <oscar@lacnic.net<mailto:oscar@lacnic.net>> Cc: Elizabeth Le <elizabeth.le@icann.org<mailto:elizabeth.le@icann.org>>, Samantha Eisner <Samantha.Eisner@icann.org<mailto:Samantha.Eisner@icann.org>>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Subject: Next Steps in Assisting Community Work — Selection Process for Bylaws IRP Standing Panel Dear SO/AC Chairs : I am reaching out to see how we can best help you with forming this representative group. Understanding the level of work already underway in the community, we are suggesting that one way forward might be to leverage an existing community group. As you may know, one of the features of the updated Independent Review Process (IRP) under the new Bylaws is the establishment of a standing panel from which panelists shall be selected to preside over each IRP dispute. The Bylaws specify that “ICANN shall, in consultation with the Supporting Organizations [SOs] and Advisory Committees [ACs], initiate a four-step process to establish the Standing Panel…” (Bylaws, Art. 4, Sec. 4.3(j).) Notably, the SOs and ACs must collectively agree on a single proposed standing panel slate to be submitted to the ICANN Board for approval as part of the four-step process. We’ve received feedback from many SOs and ACs<https://community.icann.org/display/ESPFIRP/Relevant+Documents?preview=/9509...> as to how they envision this work getting done, and published a summary and next steps<https://community.icann.org/display/ESPFIRP/Relevant+Documents?preview=/9509...>. There is strong support for the SOs and ACs to further their selection effort of the Standing Panel through a small representative group, and ICANN org sees this as an important component to getting the Standing Panel established. In looking at the groups that are already active, one potential way to proceed is to leverage the existence of the IRP Implementation Oversight Team (IRP-IOT). The IRP-IOT, which you helped repopulate, is already comprised of people that are well qualified in issues relating to ICANN, international arbitration and dispute resolution and who are likely to have the skill sets that would be needed to lead the community work on this important endeavor. If this is a potential way forward, we could quickly work with you to explore how to appropriately do this work along with the other work underway in the IRP-IOT. We are also ready to support the community in forming a new, separate representative group to do this work. From the ICANN org side, we’re available to support the community to identify and get this representative group up and running so that the panel selection process can move forward – including identification of an expert to further support and coordinate the community work – in time to start work when the deadline for the submission of expressions interest to serve on the Standing Panel expires on 31 July. Let us know how we can help you move this work along. Best regards, David Sent from my iPhone David A. Olive Senior Vice President Policy Development Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)