[NA-Discuss] Decertification of an ALS

Houle Louis Louis.Houle at oricom.ca
Wed Jun 15 23:35:36 UTC 2011

Salut Alan and all of you,

Concerning rule 16, I just want to add that more participation would be 
great. Sometimes, it's not possible in context. Days are only 25 hours, 
and there's only 8 days a week ;-) . Missing time is not a lack of 
interest. This doesn't mean that «non-participating» member are 
«inactive» and that they don't follow this thread weekly.

Louis Houle
La Société Internet du Québec (ISOC Québec)
Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org

Le 2011-06-13 10:10, Alan Greenberg a écrit :
> There was a discussion at the NARALO meeting today on the need for
> rules and processes to decertify an ALS which no longer exists or is
> no longer active.
> Here are the procedures that are currently on the books.
>   From the ALAC ALS appliation and certification procedure
> (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/framework.htm).
> 7. Decisions to de-certify an ALS shall require a 2/3 majority of the
> members of the ALAC who cast a vote as provided in the Rules of
> Procedure of the ALAC, and any decertification decision shall be
> subject to review as provided in the ICANN Bylaws, Article IV,
> Section 2. Reasons for the ALAC to pursue de-certification action,
> and to de-certify an ALS, may include persistent non-compliance with
> significant ALS requirements. The ALAC will provide advance notice to
> the ALS in question, and the ALS will have an opportunity to be heard
> and respond to the ALAC prior to a decision on de-certification. The
> ALAC will notify the ALS of its de-certification decision and provide
> information on requesting a review of the decision.
> I. Minimum criteria for an At-Large Structure:
>      1. Commit to supporting individual Internet users' informed
> participation in ICANN by distributing to individual
> constituents/members information on relevant ICANN activities and
> issues, offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions of
> one or more of these activities and issues among individual
> constituents/members, and involving individual constituents/members
> in relevant ICANN policy development, discussions and decisions.
>      2. Be constituted so that participation by individual Internet
> users who are citizens or residents of countries within the
> Geographic Region in which the ALS is based will predominate in the
> ALS' operation. The ALS may permit additional participation by others
> that is compatible with the interests of the individual Internet
> users within the region.
>      3. Be self-supporting (not rely on ICANN for funding).
>      4. Post on the Internet (on the ALAC's website or elsewhere)
> publicly-accessible, current information about the ALS's goals,
> structure, description of constituent group(s)/membership, working
> mechanisms, leadership, and contact(s).
>      5. Assist the RALO in performing its function.
>   From the NARALO Operating Procedures
> (https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+Operating+Principles+NA-2007-1-1+Revision+1)
> 16.    When an ALS representative does not vote in 3 consecutive
> NARALO elections or does not contribute a comment on ICANN policy
> through collaboration on the At-Large discussion lists in 12
> consecutive months, it automatically loses its voting rights and
> active status within the NARALO. The ALS should be notified of the
> status change and may regain its voting rights and active status if
> within the next 12 months it votes or participates to online
> discussions, otherwise the Chair will submit to ALAC a request for
> de-certification of that ALS.
> So the current rules for us are:
> - Since we don't tend to have many votes or elections, 12 months of
> inactivity can trigger losing its active status. Assuming they are
> notified of this, 12 months later, the NARALO chair can request that
> the ALAC decertify the ALS, which requires a 2/3 vote to pass.
> I note 2 things:
> - For an ALS that no longer exists, we could institute a new
> procedure to effect the decertification faster, but it is not clear
> that for most ALSs, there is any way of definitively saying that it
> no longer exists.
> - Based on rule 16, I suspect that MANY NARALO ALSs could be put in
> the non-active status. If we apply this rule inconsistently, we could
> in theory have problems (but in practice probably not). I guess our
> real target is to get such active participation from all of our ALSs.
> Alan
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------

More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list