Thanks Maureen. I am pretty much of a newbie on the intricacies involved here, but if it is about accountability mechanisms, on the surface, it feels a little like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. I know board members do not represent the interests of various constituencies, but there it would be hoped that there is an affinity. And we have only one defined seat on this board. Maybe we could invite Leon to speak to us about this at a CPWG call and explain how it is not a fox/henhouse scenario. Marita On 7/5/2019 3:00 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Marita
Apologies I received the letter from Leon, as the Chair of the BAMC (Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee) on the 26 June - right in the middle of the Marrakech meeting and it got pushed to the back burner and was then difficult to find because the letter was in an email sent by a staff member. But it is attached below.
Personally I can't see the problem of the BAMC selecting the members for the actual committee - they only want a limited sized group and a balance of skills. Others candidates who are proposed by their SO/ACs but not selected as members can remain on the committee as observers (and don't vote).
Maureen
On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 6:35 AM Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net <mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net>> wrote:
There is a fair bit of discussion going on in NCSG re: this letter announcing that the board will vet participation in one of the current accountability mechanisms -- questions are around is this appropriate, is it even legal?
Should we be discussing this as well? The letter was sent by Leon as chair of the Board Accountability Cttee to all community leaders. See link below.
Marita
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: IRP-IOT selection/ "vetting" process Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 16:09:39 -0400 From: Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix@GMAIL.COM> <mailto:rbeauregardlacroix@GMAIL.COM> Reply-To: Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix@GMAIL.COM> <mailto:rbeauregardlacroix@GMAIL.COM> To: NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Hi all
Starting this as a separate thread as I think it is an important discussion to have.
As a relative newcomer, I'm mostly interested in knowing how often has the Board undertaken such a vetting process for participation in any form of PDP (taken broadly).
That an SO/AC chooses its own people is one thing, but here the Board has, in effect, the last say.
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: *farzaneh badii* <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com <mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>> Date: Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 3:59 PM Subject: Re: [council] Call for volunteers IRP-IOT and proposed Council endorsement process To: <NCSG-DISCUSS@listserv.syr.edu <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@listserv.syr.edu>>
Thanks Rafik
I have to say I am stunned by the board decision to be involved in vetting the applicants for IOT membership. This is the group that is going to come up with procedures to hold the board accountable. Board decided to have a say in the selection? This is astonishing. I don't know how the board doesn't see what is wrong with such involvement.
If NCSG agrees we need to send a formal letter to the board and remind them what IOT is for!
On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 3:54 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi all,
For those interested to volunteer to IRP-IOT please review carefully the call here https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/sanchez-to-siddiqui-et-... [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system...> and if you would like to get GNSO council support read the details below.
Best regards,
Rafik
---------- Forwarded message ---------
Dear Council Members, SG/C Chairs,
As you may be aware, the ICANN Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee (BAMC) recently launched a call for volunteers to recompose the Independent Review Process (IRP) Implementation Oversight Team (IOT) (see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/sanchez-to-siddiqui-et-... [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system...>) . The letter also notes that ‘if any SO/AC wishes to vet candidates through its own candidate selection process, the BAMC welcomes that work, diligence, and indication of support when passing the candidate further into the process’.
As during recent discussions, Council members as well as GNSO community members have highlighted the importance of this process and the need for the GNSO to contribute candidates with expertise to this process, Council leadership would like to propose the following steps:
1. Any candidates interested in GNSO Council endorsement should send their Expressions of Interest describing how his or her experience aligns with the skills identified, as well as a commitment to the estimated time demands to gnso-secs@icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> by Friday 12 July 2019. 2. Council leadership will evaluate the applications against the skills and experience outlined in the call for volunteers (see also below). 3. Council leadership will share with the Council the proposed candidates for GNSO Council endorsement by 17 July 2019 at the latest. 4. Council to consider proposed candidates for endorsement during 18 July 2019 GNSO Council meeting. 5. GNSO Secretariat to submit EOIs of endorsed candidates by 31 July 2019 at the latest. 6. All the EOIs of the candidates that meet the qualifications will be provided to the BAMC for evaluation and identification of new members.
If you have any questions or concerns about this proposed process, please let us know as soon as possible. We appreciate that the timeline is short, but we hope this will not prevent you from encouraging members who have the required skills and experience from applying. To be clear, nothing prevents those not seeking GNSO Council endorsement from submitting their applications directly to the BAMC.
With best regards,
Pam Little and Rafik Dammak, Vice Chairs, GNSO Council
On behalf of GNSO Council Leadership
From https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/sanchez-to-siddiqui-et-... [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system...>
*Skills and Experience Required *
The IOT has very important work remaining, including the finalization of a set of Updated Supplementary Procedures that will define the conduct of IRPs and assure that the purposes of the IRP are upheld. These Procedures must also align with principles of international arbitration. As a result, those members of our community that you identify and encourage to join the IOT, should have the necessary legal or judicial skills and experience in disputes such as IRPs, arbitrations, or other alternate dispute resolution processes. Specific familiarity with ICANN’s accountability mechanisms is another important skill that we hope to see amongst new members. No single candidate must bring all of this experience, but as we look at the IOT as a whole, we are striving for a variety of experiences that, taken together, make the IOT well-suited to finalize a set of procedures to conduct IRP proceedings. IOT members must also have the time and availability to attend at least a one hour call each week to participate on IOT telephonic meetings, as well as sufficient availability to contribute to the work online.
-- Farzaneh _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ 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.