RE: No current suspensions,,,, was:Re: [ga] Public Comment: Proposed Bylaw Changes to Improve Accountability
- To: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Glen de Saint Géry'" <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: No current suspensions,,,, was:Re: [ga] Public Comment: Proposed Bylaw Changes to Improve Accountability
- From: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:47:55 +0100
As List Monitor at the time of Jeff Williams' suspension, I followed the GA
rules exactly. In my opinion the suspension is valid and should be
maintained. As far as I am aware, Jeff Williams will have his posting
privileges reinstated on the 5th of August 2009.
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Sent: 02 August 2009 05:07
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Glen de Saint Géry
Subject: Re: No current suspensions,,,, was:Re: [ga] Public Comment:
Proposed Bylaw Changes to Improve Accountability
In light of your notice of this thread. In furtherance and keeping with the
intent and spirit of ICANN's changes to increase Public Comment and create a
more inclusive environment:
The suspension from the GA list of Jeff Williams was actuated by a since
It was contrary to our best rules of procedure.
However it was allowed until this time.
While our rules have many questionable processes and are lacking in broad
support, they are in fact the best we have since the passage of resolution
20070906-2 of the GNSO Council, which was passed at our request to self
As is obvious from the original title of this thread, ICANN is dynamic and
changing. In order for there to be an effective public comment forum
specifically for the GNSO we must start fresh with no suspensions.
Eric Hugh Dierker
--- On Wed, 7/29/09, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ga] Public Comment: Proposed Bylaw Changes to Improve
To: "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2009, 1:39 AM
Public Comment: Proposed Bylaw Changes to Improve Accountability
27 July 2009
Two proposed accountability measures have been posted by direction of the
Board for 60 days of public comments, from 23 July 2009 through 25 September
2009. This is the latest step in the Improving Institutional Confidence
The first bylaw revision is a new mechanism called the "Community
Re-Examination Vote". It would allow the ICANN community to request the
Board to re-examine a Board decision taken by resolution.
The second proposal would revise one of the existing bylaws and replace the
independent third-party review process with a more robust process, the
"Independent Review Body".
These proposals represent a significant step forward in ICANN's already
considerable accountability. The draft bylaw changes have been developed in
response to community input to the President's Strategy Committee over the
last 12 months.
You are invited to review the proposed changes to the ICANN Bylaws linked to
on this page and provide your input to the public comments forum.
Details of proposed changes
1. Community Re-Examination Vote
The ICANN Bylaws currently set forth three mechanisms for accountability and
review of ICANN Board decisions: (1) the Reconsideration Process, Article
IV, Section 2; (2) the Independent Review Process, Article IV, Section 3;
and (3) the Office of the Ombudsman, Article V.
The objective is for this procedure to allow the ICANN community to come
together through the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees and
vote for the Board to re-examine a Board decision taken by resolution.
The proposed Bylaws setting forth the Community Re-Examination Vote are
available here [PDF, 53K].
2. Independent Review Body
ICANN has an Independent Review Process in place, as established at Article
IV, Section 3 (1) of the bylaws:
"ICANN shall have in place a separate process for independent third-party
review of Board actions alleged by an affected party to be inconsistent with
the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws."
The provider for the current Independent Review Process is the International
Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR). (More detail about the Independent
Review Process is available here:
The existing review process is limited in scope, and focuses mainly whether
the Board has followed ICANN's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws when
rendering a decision. The current review process relies mainly upon the
concepts of fidelity and fairness.
However, following extensive and sustained public input on this issue, the
PSC recommended a broadening of the review process to allow for review of
the rationality of Board decisions as well.
The proposed changes that would create the Independent Review Body would
allow reviews of both the rationality and the fairness of Board decisions.
These concepts are described under the rubrics of Fairness, Fidelity and
Rationality in the May 2009 the staff report ("Improving Institutional
Confidence: The Way Forward"
The proposed amendments to the Bylaws setting forth the IRB process are
9-en.pdf [PDF, 153K]. Please note: the attached document with the proposed
bylaw text is presented in 'track changes' version to allow you to compare
the proposed text to the existing text of the bylaws.
ICANN's legal staff expects the procedures and rules for the existing
Independent Review Process would broadly serve the expanded scope of the IRB
but that some revisions will be required to make them conform fully to the
IRB bylaw provisions, if adopted.
The proposed new accountability measures are based on recommendations made
to the Board by the President's Strategy Committee (PSC) in February 2009.
At the Mexico City meeting in March 2009, the Board directed staff to
produce implementation analysis of the PSC proposals.
On 31 May 2009, the report "Improving Institutional Confidence: The Way
published for information and discussion ahead of the Sydney meeting in June
2009. This report included two detailed proposals for implementing the PSC's
recommended bylaw changes to modify or create accountability and review
At the Sydney meeting in June 2009, the Board acknowledged this report and
directed the opening of a 60-day period of public consultation on the
proposed bylaw changes.
(For more information about the PSC's work, including previous documents and
public comment periods, please visit: http://www.icann.org/en/jpa/iic/.
Information about the PSC itself is at http://www.icann.org/en/psc)
Deadline and How to Submit Comments:
Public comments on these proposals will run for 60 days, from 27 July 2009
through 25 September 2009.
To submit comments:
Comments are welcome via email to: iic-proposed-bylaws@xxxxxxxxx
To view comments: An archive of all comments received will be publicly
posted at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/iic-proposed-bylaws/
Glen de Saint Géry