[ALAC] Overlap between ALSes and non-At-Large parts of the ICANN community

[Alan Greenberg]

This is a long message, but the issue is important. Please take the 
time to read it carefully. This particularly applies to current ALAC 
Members and RALO Leaders.

Over the past years, there have been many discussions about whether 
it is problematic to have both individuals and ALSes associated with 
At-Large to be members (or voting members) of other parts of the 
ICANN Community (and in particular, NCSG).

These issues have never been resolved, and although they have come up 
for discussion regularly, addressing them has always been deferred.

To the extent that these issues fall under the remit of the 
ALS-Mobilization Working Party (WP), they have been discussed at length.

We are in the process of finalizing our report on ALS Expectations 
and Criteria, and as such have tentatively finalized our 
recommendation related to these areas. I would like to present them 
to this group so that any comments can be brought back to the WP.

We looked at two areas:
1. Whether there is any problem with ALS representatives joining and 
participating in other parts of ICANN
2. Whether an organization that is an ALS can be an institutional 
member of some other part of ICANN

To set the stage, one should note:
- we have MANY individuals associated with At-Large (including ALAC 
Members) who are members of NCSG and a few who are members of various 
other parts of the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, SSAC, the Board and no doubt 
other parts of ICANN;
- we have about 40 ALSes that are also institutional members of NCSG.
- Other groups, particularly within the GNSO have rules that multiple 
memberships may exist, but only once can have vote-casting privileges 
(such as between the Registrar and Registry SGs, or the Business and 
Intellectual Property Constituencies). There also rules that prohibit 
multiple memberships in specific situations.

1. ALS Representatives

There was virtually no concern with an ALS Representative being a 
non-voting member of some other part of ICANN (presuming the concept 
of a non-voting member applies to that other group). ALS Reps may 
cast votes within RALOs (either based on their own views or directed 
by their ALS leadership or membership (we do NOT tell ALSes how to 
conduct their affairs). There was some concern about an ALS Rep doing 
so while also holding a vote in some other part of ICANN. However, 
there was a very strong consensus that the nature of votes within a 
RALO, and the impact that these votes have on substantive policy 
issues or the selection of individuals was not sufficiently large as 
to warrant rules prohibiting such involvement. The group did however 
strongly support full disclosure of any such overlaps.

According, our current recommendation reads:

There is no prohibition on an ALS Representative holding roles in 
other parts of ICANN (non-At-Large), but those roles comparable to 
those listed below must be formally declared.

a) Member of another constituent part of ICANN (AC/SO, sub-constituency)
b) Leadership role in any of the above
c) Member of a non-At-Large working group (such as GNSO PDP, CCWG, etc)
d) Formally appointed representative of a non-At-Large ICANN group to 
a PDP, CCWG, Specific Review, etc)
e) Leader of a non-At-Large working group (such as GNSO PDP, CCWG, 
Specific Review)

Note that this is ONLY in reference to ALS Representatives. Some WP 
members expressed concern if, for instance, an ALAC member help an 
influential role in another part of ICANN, but rules governing ALAC 
Members are FAR out of the scope of the WP. We did note that the ALAC 
might wish to have such a discussion at some point.

2. ALS Institutional Membership

This question concerns whether an entity that is an ALS may also be a 
member of some other part of ICANN (regardless of whether the 
representatives to each part of ICANN are the same or different people).

Again, there was little concern for an ALS being an non-voting 
INSTITUTIONAL member of some other part of ICANN. The discussion on 
whether dual voting is problematic was quite spirited and strong 
positions were taken on both sides. However, after a substantial 
discussion on what the actual harm was that we were trying to avoid, 
and in fact, the perceived harm of currently having nearly 40 ALSes 
with voting rights in both and At-Large RALO and the NCSG, there was 
a very strong consensus in the WP there was in fact no real harm.

Accordingly our current recommendation reads:

There is no prohibition related to an ALS being an institutional 
member of some other part of ICANN (such as the NCSG or IPC within 
the GNSO, or a member of the ccNSO), but such an overlapped 
membership must be declared in the ALS application and in the biennial report.

So in summary, in both cases, there was a strong consensus that 
although concerns had been expressed, we could not find any real harm 
in the current status quo, and that disclosure could address any 
perceived conflicts.

I and the WP would appreciate comments, and in particular, those from 
people who believe that our recommendations are wrong (explaining why).

Alan


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20200420/73d3cf3a/attachment.html>