Re: [council] NCSG councillors' statements

[Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks, Marilia. For the record, we have received the statements from you, 
David Cake (supported by Julf) and the IPC by the deadline of 18.00 UTC. These 
will now be included in the letter transmitting the results to the 
CCWG-Accountabilty Chairs.

Best regards,

Marika

From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on 
behalf of Marilia Maciel 
<mariliamaciel@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:mariliamaciel@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday 9 March 2016 at 17:53
To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [council] NCSG councillors' statements

Dear James, dear colleagues,

I would like to convey to you the statements that the NCSG councillors would 
like to see included in the records of today's approval of the CCWG 
Accountability proposal.

Thank you
Marília



These comments are submitted by the councillors identified under each of the 
recommendations to either clarify our understanding of the recommendations, or 
put some concerns associated with them on the record. They are not meant, in 
any way, to either renegotiate the substance of the recommendations, nor 
provide any instructions regarding their implementation. It is also important 
to be clear that the councillors identified with each of the comments have 
supported these recommendations, and have voted in favor of the GNSO adopting 
them as one of the chartering organizations from the ICANN names community.

Recommendation #2: Empowering the Community through Consensus: Engagement, 
Escalation, and Enforcement

Statement presented on behalf of Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin and 
Marília Maciel.


The aforementioned NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support 
Recommendation 2 with the understanding that bylaws will reflect the CCWG's 
requirement that the exercise of community powers should not require unanimity 
of participating AC/SOs, and that no single AC/SO could block exercise of any 
power.


Statement presented by Stefania Milan

A number of members of the NCSG are concerned about providing governments with 
the new powers contained in the Empowered Community and the impact of changing 
the fundamental nature of governments at ICANN by allowing GAC to be a 
Decisional Participant.


Recommendation #7: Strengthening ICANN’s Independent Review Process

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, 
Marília Maciel, Stefania Milan


The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 7 
with the understanding that the revised Cooperative Engagement Procedure and 
the IRP processes will : 1) allow any person, group, or entity “materially 
affected” by an ICANN action or inaction in violation of ICANN’s Articles of 
Incorporation and/or Bylaws to have the right to equal participation in CEP and 
IRP proceedings on par with the original IRP filer; 2) require timely 
notification at filing to all parties known to be materially affected by the 
process or decision being challenged; 3) require ICANN to provide prompt and 
timely publication to the larger community of the filing so that other 
interested and materially affected parties can come forward to participate; and 
4) enable and support the timely, full and equal participation of all 
materially affected parties in an IRP proceeding.  It is our understanding that 
reform of the Cooperative Engagement Process (CEP) is included in the IRP 
implementation plan.


Recommendation #8: Improving ICANN’s Request for Reconsideration Process

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, 
Marília Maciel, Stefania Milan

The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 
8, but emphasise that the Ombudsman may not be the proper office to evaluate a 
RFR and make an initial recommendation to the BGC. We encourage WS2 to consider 
whether another office or official should be  granted this authority instead.  
We want to emphasize that this responsibility should be independent or at a 
minimum neutral and insulated from pressure from the ICANN Board and staff. 
Under no circumstances should ICANN's Office of the General Counsel assume this 
responsibility.


Recommendation #10: Enhancing the Accountability of Supporting Organizations 
and Advisory Committees

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, 
Stefania Milan


The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 
10, but are concerned that Recommendation 10 would allow the Board too much 
control over SO/AC reviews that could  undermine the bottom-up structure of 
ICANN. Therefore, implementation of Recommendation 10 should ensure that the 
terms of reference of a review should be developed in a cooperative manner 
between the Board and the AC/SO under review. The GNSO also believes as a 
matter of fairness that the GAC, if it becomes a decisional participant in 
ICANN, should also be subject to some manner of review as with the other AC/SOs.


Recommendation #11: Board Obligations with Regard to Governmental Advisory 
Committee Advice

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, 
Marília Maciel

The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 
welcome the important accountability reform of locking-in the definition of 
“consensus advice” for the Governmental Advisory Committee, which triggers the 
board’s obligation to consider that advice and reach a mutually agreeable 
solution. Nonetheless we remain concerned because it raises the threshold by 
which the board can refuse to follow GAC advice.


Statement presented by Stefania Milan

A number of NCSG members remain concerned about providing GAC enhanced power 
over the ICANN Board of Directors, and about the Board’s ability to refuse to 
follow GAC advice, particularly when said advice contradicts policy developed 
through the bottom-up policy development process by the ICANN community.



Recommendation #12: Committing to Further Accountability Work in Work Stream 2

Statement presented on behalf of: Amr Elsadr, David Cake, Stephanie Perrin, 
Marília Maciel, Stefania Milan

The following NCSG representatives in the GNSO council support Recommendation 
12 with the understanding that WS2 issues, while not necessary for the 
transition to occur, remain vitally important and must be budgeted and 
supported at a level sufficient to ensure their development and implementation.

--
Marília Maciel
Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School
http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts

DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu<http://www.diplomacy.edu>
PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/
Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - 
http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en