Hi Council

I’d like to raise some general questions about the extent and nature of the Council’s involvement in Implementation Review Team (IRT) deliberations, specifically, when and how such involvement should occur. These questions are not related to any particular IRT discussion but stem from broader observations about process and governance.

In a recent instance, I noticed that despite a clear majority position within the IRT, the matter was still referred to the Council. Later, the Board also weighed in, aligning itself with the minority view. This raised questions for me about the appropriate triggers and boundaries for Council and Board engagement in IRT processes.

To help clarify this, I’d like to propose the following questions for discussion:

  1. Under what circumstances should a Council liaison to an IRT bring an issue to the Council?

  2. Should the liaison do so only when directed by the IRT, or can they raise issues on their own initiative?

  3. Should matters still be referred to the Council even when there is a clear majority position within the IRT?

  4. Similarly, what processes, if any, guide when and how the Board should intervene in IRT deliberations? Should such interventions be based on legal analysis, or on broader policy considerations?

I am not suggesting that this discussion delay other ongoing work or votes, but I believe it would be useful for the Council to have a shared understanding of these procedural boundaries. Perhaps we could include this as a discussion item during the Dublin meeting.

Farzaneh