[ALAC] Fwd: Revised Rationale for Rejection of NCSG Reconsideration Request & Proposed Motion for Durban Council Meeting
Alan Greenberg
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Fri Jun 28 03:26:33 UTC 2013
In relation to my last note, I find this rather
interesting, and something that the ALAC may want
to think about. Specifically should we request a
similar Bylaw revision for our formal advice.
Perhaps this is something we want to put on the ALAC-Board meeting agenda.
Alan
>From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman at neustar.us>
>To: "GNSO Council (council at gnso.icann.org)" <council at gnso.icann.org>
>CC: 'Glen de Saint Géry' <Glen at icann.org>
>Subject: [council] Revised Rationale for
>Rejection of NCSG Reconsideration Request &
> Proposed Motion for Durban Council Meeting
>Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 02:43:39 +0000
>
>Although I am sure that some on the Council will
>still disagree with the new rationale posted at
><http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/governance/reconsideration/recommendation-ncsg-25jun13-en.pdf>http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/governance/reconsideration/recommendation-ncsg-25jun13-en.pdf,
>I believe the rationale is much more consistent
>with, and recognizes, the value of the
>multi-stakeholder model. The tone has been
>softened considerably and is much more
>respectful, in my opinion. In addition, the
>rationale upon my quick read seems to be
>technically correct. I am grateful to the Board
>Governance Committee for having taken some of
>our comments very seriously and for making the
>appropriate changes to the rationale.
>
>The one item I would still like to see addressed
>by the Council (other than the Policy v.
>Implementation discussions within the GNSO
>Working Group process) is formalizing the
>requirement through a proposed Bylaws Amendment
>requiring consultation of the GNSO if the Board
>proposes to take an action that is inconsistent
>with a policy or statement of the GNSO. I
>intend to draft that motion for the Councils consideration in Durban.
>
>To give all of the constituencies ample time to
>review the motion prior to Durban, although I am
>sure some will seek to defer the motion,
>claiming insufficient time to review, I am
>attaching this proposed resolution for
>consideration in Durban. I am happy to take comments, edits or suggestions:
>
>
>WHEREAS, the ICANN Bylaws currently
>state: There shall be a policy-development body
>known as the Generic Names Supporting
>Organization (GNSO), which shall be responsible
>for developing and recommending to the ICANN
>Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains;
>
>WHEREAS, the Board Governance Committee has
>recognized in Reconsideration Request 13-3 that
>As of now, there is no defined policy or
>process within ICANN that requires Board or
>staff consultation with the GNSO Council if the
>Board or staff is acting in contravention to a
>statement made by the GNSO Council outside of the PDP; and
>
>WHEREAS, the GNSO Council believes that such a
>defined policy or process is now needed.
>RESOLVED: The GNSO Council recommends that the
>ICANN Bylaws be amended to include language
>requiring a formal consultation process in the
>event that the ICANN Board determines to take an
>action that is not consistent with GNSO policies
>or recommendations. Such process shall require
>the ICANN Board to state the reasons why it
>decided not to follow GNSO recommendations or
>policies, and be followed in a timely manner,
>with a consultation in which the GNSO and the
>ICANN Board attempt in good faith to find a
>mutually acceptable solution. If no such
>solution can be found, the ICANN Board will
>state in its final decision the reasons why the
>GNSO recommendations or policies were not followed.
>
>FURTHER RESOLVED that the GNSO recommends the
>above to apply whether or not the policy
>development process as set forth in Article X, section 6 were followed.
>
>
>
>
>Jeffrey J. Neuman
>Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
>46000 Center Oak Plaza, Sterling, VA 20166
>Office: +1.571.434.5772 Mobile:
>+1.202.549.5079 Fax: +1.703.738.7965 /
><mailto:jeff.neuman at neustar.biz>jeff.neuman at neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz
>
More information about the ALAC
mailing list