From the letter: " Under the ICANN Bylaws, the Board is obliged to take duly into account any advice timely presented by the Governmental Advisory Committee, prior to taking action." I thought the bylaws also embedded obligations to timely appreciate GNSO Policy recommendations ? Rubens

On 15 Oct 2019, at 10:24, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:

Dear Councilors,

You may be interested to know that the Board responded yesterday to the GAC’s letter of 20 August. The GAC had requested that the Board refrain from acting on Recommendations 1-4 from the IGO-INGO Curative Rights PDP and restated the GAC’s willingness to participate in the GNSO’s new chartering effort with respect to Recommendation 5.

The GAC’s letter was published and is available for your review here:https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/ismail-to-chalaby-20aug....

Cheers Mary

<2019-10-14 Cherine Chalaby to Manal Ismail Board Response to GAC Letter.pdf>_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council

_______________________________________________ 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.