[ALAC] Confidentiality

[Tijani BENJEMAA]

I fully agree with Roberto.

Especially when he compared the 360 review with the candidates’ references.
If the 360 review should go to the voters, the information given by the
referees for each candidate should also be given to the voters too. 

 

I said on the call that the 360 review will be public if it’s given to the
voters; I meant the risk of having it on the market place will increase
dramatically.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Executive Director

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)

Phone:  + 216 41 649 605

Mobile: + 216 98 330 114

Fax:       + 216 70 853 376

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

 

 

 

 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Olivier MJ
Crepin-Leblond
Envoyé : mardi 17 décembre 2013 19:00
À : Roberto Gaetano
Cc : 'ICANN At-Large Staff'; 'ALAC Working List'
Objet : Re: [ALAC] Confidentiality

 

Dear Roberto,

 

apologies for this - you must have been muted because I did not hear you.

Your comments are well received and I note your last point regarding

confidentiality and the hypothesis of having BCEC members share

information.

The discussion is open.

Kind regards,

 

Olivier

 

On 17/12/2013 17:19, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> 

> I was trying unsuccessfully to ask for the floor after the comments

> from Tijani and Alan, maybe my line was muted, then I had to go back

> to my meeting, where I am right now.

> 

> I would like to go on record saying that:

> 

> ·         I share completely what Tijani has said -- as a matter of

> fact we had discussed and agreed in Buenos Aires our common position.

> The wider the number of people that have access to a piece of

> information, the higher the risk that we have leaking data, and from

> that on the step to the information being public is very small.

> 

> ·         BCEC has taken the issue of confidentiality very seriously,

> I have consulted with the NomCom Chair and with ICANN General Counsel

> and then decided to require the non-disclosure to be signed by all,

> before giving access to confidential material.

> 

> ·         If the principle of access to the current Board member

> evaluation by the voters, although being a theoretically valid

> question, brings as a corollary the question on why should the voters

> also not have access to the reference letters for all candidates. You

> see that, step by step, we can undermine completely the

> confidentiality, and therefore the trust in the process.

> 

> ·         The ALAC can decide to open up to a larger audience but I

> would strongly recommend, if you do so, to at least require a

> non-disclosure similar to the one that BCEC members have signed. I

> would also encourage you to look for advice by General Counsel.

> 

> ·         The hypothesis of having BCEC members to informally share

> information with the regional voters is in open violation of the

> confidentiality agreement signed by BCEC members.

> 

> Thanks,

> 

> Roberto

> 

>  

> 

 

-- 

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD

http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

 

_______________________________________________

ALAC mailing list

ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org

https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

 

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org

ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C)