RE: [council] Draft Statement for Public Forum

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Some revisions:


The GNSO Council would like to remind the ICANN staff and Board that it is the 
only entity charged with policy development and providing recommendations to 
the Board on substantive policies relating to generic top level domains. The 
GNSO Council recently provided advice in response to a letter from the CEO to 
the effect that an issue being considered was a matter of policy, rather than 
implementation. It was Staff's view that the issue was implementation and not 
policy, and accordingly it was the Staff's decision to proceed with 
implementation of what the majority of the Council believed was policy. It is 
the Council's firmly held view that when there is not an agreement on whether 
or not such an item is policy, as in this case, that the Staff and/or the ICANN 
Board must refer back to the Council before proceeding further.

Indeed, as a general point, it is the Council's view that should it provide 
policy advice to the Staff and/or the Board in the future, then in the event 
that Staff and/or Board seek to act in a manner that is not consistent with the 
Council's advice, then the Staff and/or Board must consult with the GNSO 
Council, explain the rationale behind its decision, and allow the Council, at a 
minimum, to respond to the Staff or Board's decision.



Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:54 PM
To: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] Draft Statement for Public Forum


Draft Statement for Public Forum:

The GNSO Council recently provided advice in response to a letter from the CEO 
to the effect that an issue being considered was a matter of policy, rather 
than implementation. It was Staff's view that the issue was implementation and 
not policy, and accordingly it was the Staff's decision to proceed with the 
first steps of implementation. It is the Council's firmly held view that when 
there is not an agreement on whether or not such an item is policy, as in this 
case, that the Staff must refer back to the Council before proceeding further.

Indeed, as a general point, it is the Council's view that should it provide 
policy advice to the Staff and/or the Board in the future, then in the event 
that Staff and/or Board seek to act adverse to the Council's advice, they 
should certainly not do so without further reference back to the Council.