[EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election Results

Fri Dec 8 10:58:30 CST 2006

Dear list,

the dicussion is interesting and pushes us deeper into the legal basis of our work. The legal basis for the election of the ALAC-Liaison to the Board is in Article XI, Section 2, Para 4.e: "The ALAC shall annually appoint one non-voting liaison to the ICANN Board of Directors, without limitation on re-appointment."

You have the same the formulations in the other articles for the other advisory committees. The established practice is that the liaison is a full member of the advisory committee. It is quite natural that the liaison of the GAC is a member of th GAC. In this case it is the chair of the advisory committee who is ex-officia the liaison. It is also clear that the liaison of the Root Server System Advisory Committee is  member of the RSSAC. This is also a question of legitimacy. The position is not to liaise the constituency with the Board but to liaise the committee with the board. If it would be a liasion between the board and the constituency, than the constituency would be the body which have to vote, not only the 15 committee members. And than probably other non committee members would have been also interested to be a candidate for such a liaison position.  

In our case I see not problem with Vittorio as long he is a member of ALAC and he should get the full support both from the committee and the constituency. He was appointed as ALAC member by the Board in 2002 and as long as there is no new appointment by the board and as long we have not yet ALAC members elected by the RALO he has the full legitimacy to serve as the Board-ALAC liaison after his election yesterday. Situation could be different if Vittorio is no longer a member of ALAC. If the EURALO will be established in March 2007 and will have elections and Vittorio is not elected, this could create a legal problem. I do not know whether we can ask in such a case for an exception, at least until November 2007 when ALAC has to made the next appointment. To be on the safe I would encourage the ALAC chair to consult with ICANNs Legal Advsier to find out what the specific regulation is and which space for interpretation we have. 

best regards

Wolfgang

. 

, and shall, after consultation with each RALO, annually appoint five voting delegates (no two of whom shall be citizens of countries in the same Geographic Region, as defined according to Section 5 of Article VI <http://www.icann.org/general/archive-bylaws/bylaws-28feb06.htm#VI-5> ) to the Nominating Committee.

________________________________

Von: euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org im Auftrag von Jeanette Hofmann
Gesendet: Fr 08.12.2006 14:49
An: Discussion for At-Large Europe; roberto at icann.org
Betreff: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election Results

Roberto Gaetano schrieb:
> I don't think that this was the situation "by design", but rather a side
> effect on how the bylaws are written.

Hi Roberto,

this is the problem with ICANN as I see it since I watch its
performance. There are always honorable reasons for maintaining
ambiguous practices or stretching rules. But from the outside, such
practices look somewhat fishy.

In order to grow up and to gain the trust ICANN needs to do its work, it
is really, really necessary that ICANN establishes an equivalent to the
rule of law, an equivalent that provides for reliable procedures and
predictable decisions.

Your small steps, no big waves approach makes sense from an insider's
perpective but from outside, it looks like more of the same muddling
through approach that seems so characterstic for many of ICANN's decisions.

I know, I am repeating myself, I said the very same thing on another
list a few days ago: ICANN needs to constitutionlize itself, its actions
need to follow self binding rules that people know and that people can
appeal to if they are supposedly violated. ALAC should not be an
exception to this but rather a model for other constiuencies or groups
in ICANN.

jeanette

> We are getting there with small steps, not to create too big waves.
> We did it with Bret as GTLD Liaison, in the moment when we were also
> replacing another NA member (John Levine was selected).
> We are trying this with Vittorio, as the situation is now that it would take
> an active step by the Board to discontinue him after his expiration as ALAC
> member, and I don't think that the Board will ever open this can of worms.
> Then we will much better off for claiming it as established practice.
> This is, at least, my approach. Sorry for being more careful than some of
> you would like, but I have the impression that this strategy has paid off,
> up to now. Also, I do believe that one thing is a proposal for candidature
> that comes from an ALS, and another thing, with more weight, will be a
> candidature that comes from a established RALO.
> Cheers,
> Roberto
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On
>> Behalf Of Jeanette Hofmann
>> Sent: 08 December 2006 10:03
>> To: Discussion for At-Large Europe
>> Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee
>> Election Results
>>
>>
>>
>> Roberto Gaetano schrieb:
>>> Two additions to the comprehensive explanation by Vittorio.
>>>
>>> There is nothing that prevents Vittorio to continue as
>> Board Liaison
>>> even if he terminates as ALAC member. Quite the contrary,
>> this is an
>>> advantage, as we will have the possibility to cover this
>> task without
>>> impacting on the other activities, that will be carried on by the
>>> regular members. It was already the case for Bret as GTLD Liaison.
>> Now, this is interesting. Anybody can be nominated or run for
>> the position as board liaison? If this is indeed the case,
>> you might have got a long list of candidates if this had been
>> known to more people.
>>
>> jeanette
>>
>>> In the future, ALSes and RALOs will be able to influence also the
>>> internal mechanisms, if they discuss the matter in advance and via
>>> their two representatives can bring motions to the ALAC.
>> This, based
>>> on what is discussed above, might include candidatures to Liaison
>>> positions (but not Chair or Vice Chair positions).
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Roberto
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>> [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of
>>>> Vittorio Bertola
>>>> Sent: 08 December 2006 09:19
>>>> To: patrick at isoc.lu; Discussion for At-Large Europe
>>>> Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] At-Large Advisory Committee Election
>>>> Results
>>>>
>>>> Patrick Vande Walle ha scritto:
>>>>> A few days ago, it was explained on this list that the
>> nomcom chair
>>>>> would suggest a name for the ALAC liaison. Now we see
>> that the ALAC
>>>>> actually had a vote. Who decided that and when ? Who voted
>>>> in favour
>>>>> on this change ? who voted against ?
>>>> I think that there is a misunderstanding. The message that
>> was sent
>>>> some time ago was about appointing one new ALAC member
>> representing
>>>> EURALO, since Annette, who was previously sitting in one
>> of the two
>>>> EURALO seats, decided to apply for Roberto's seat - the one
>>>> representing ICANN and appointed by the ICANN Nomcom - and
>> the Nomcom
>>>> picked her. Thus, this frees up one of the two EURALO
>> seats, which,
>>>> until we formally incorporate EURALO and sign an MoU with
>> ICANN, is
>>>> to be filled by the ICANN Board. As soon as we sign that MoU, the
>>>> ICANN-Board-appointed ALAC members (they being me and whoever will
>>>> get appointed in place of Annette in the next few weeks)
>> will expire,
>>>> and EURALO will have to appoint two representatives in the ALAC.
>>>>
>>>> The ICANN Board, however, usually asks for advice before
>> making the
>>>> appointment; initially, since this is going to be a short-lived
>>>> appointment - we hope to finalize the EURALO process by the ICANN
>>>> Lisbon meeting, next March - Roberto and I suggested that we could
>>>> ask the Nomcom to provide another name, which would have
>> allowed the
>>>> Board to make a very quick appointment, and thus to bring the
>>>> appointed person here in Sao Paulo for this ICANN meeting.
>> However,
>>>> there was another proposal that the three European ALAC
>> members pick
>>>> someone instead. I strongly disagree on that, because I
>> think that if
>>>> we don't go for a quick appointment, then it should be the
>> ALSes who
>>>> suggest someone, also because it might be someone that the ALSes
>>>> might want to reappoint after we sign the MoU in March
>> (though there
>>>> is absolutely no constraint to that effect). So we discussed the
>>>> matter here in Sao Paulo, and all the three European ALAC members
>>>> agreed to make a call to the European ALSes to suggest one or more
>>>> names, to be then discussed and forwarded to the ICANN Board for
>>>> consideration; Annette is supposed to post that call shortly.
>>>>
>>>> In any case, please all of you start considering and
>> posting possible
>>>> nominees (or self-nominations) as temporary European ALAC member,
>>>> even if it might be just for a few months and for one
>> ICANN meeting
>>>> in Lisbon. Also, I want to make it clear that I will not
>> reapply for
>>>> my seat, I think that four years is enough and I really
>> want some new
>>>> people from this group to be able to serve on the ALAC (I
>> said this
>>>> in public before being appointed as ALAC Board liaison, so
>> it's not
>>>> connected to that).
>>>>
>>>> The message that Nick sent yesterday, instead, was about
>> the internal
>>>> ALAC appointments: the ALAC, as any Committee, has to appoint its
>>>> Chair, Vice Chairs, and also a number of liaisons to other bodies.
>>>> These positions are to be filled internally by the ALAC, as they
>>>> represent the distribution of labour among its members. In this
>>>> specific case, there was no established procedure, and even no
>>>> advance knowledge of all the nominations, so it was actually
>>>> impossible to have any further consultation - it was all decided
>>>> yesterday at an open meeting of the ALAC. I still see it a bit
>>>> difficult to imagine that these positions can be filled by
>> a broader
>>>> group than the ALAC itself, since they are really connected to
>>>> internal balances in a 15-people group that has to work
>> together, but
>>>> I already suggested that the ALAC should have better
>> procedures for
>>>> these appointments, which could allow sufficient time to have a
>>>> consultation with the RALOs about the various nominees.
>>>>
>>>> Ciao,
>>>> --
>>>> vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a]
>>>> bertola.eu.org]<-----
>>>> http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>>>> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a
>>>> tlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>>> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-l
>>> ists.icann.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a
>> tlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> EURO-Discuss mailing list
> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org

_______________________________________________
EURO-Discuss mailing list
EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org