Page History
...
Sub-group Members: Alan Greenberg, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Christopher Wilkinson, Farzanah Badii, Isaac Maposa, Jorge Cancio, Jorge Villa, Julf Helsingius, Kavouss Arasteh, Olga Cavalli, Rosalia Morales, Sebastien Bachollet, Seun Ojedeji, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy, Steve DelBianco, Tom Dale (16)
Observers: Andreea Brambilla, Berry Cobb, Meghan Healy, Michael Abejuela, Nigel Hickson (5)
Staff: Brenda Brewer, Karen Mulberry, Lars Hoffman, Nathalie Vergnolle, Tristana Webster
Apologies: Avri Doria, Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Herb Waye, Greg Shatan
** If your name is missing from attendance or apology, please send note to acct-staff@icann.org **
Transcript
Recording
Agenda
0. Call Administration
1. Review of any AI's from call #10 on October 20th see: https://community.icann.org/x/vQS4Aw
2. Recap of Hyderabad Meeting
3. Next Steps in our Work Plan
- Methodology for review of replies to our Survey questions (from mid Dec)
- Use of IRP track - starting the discussion; we propose a briefing from IRP WT Chair at next call
- Preparation for next report to CCWG and timeline adjustments required propose a small drafting team be formed
- When and how to approach the matter of our mandate to discuss the Mutual Accountability Framework (as proposed for consideration in WS1) and any other Mutual Accountability Matters
- Basic foundations for our required 'Enhancing SOAC Accountability Workplan'
- Our part in 2017 Public Comment documentation
4. Next Meeting and future Meeting schedule
5. AOB and recap of any AI's
Notes
0. Call Administration
- Cheryl will update her SOI to reflect her recent appointment.
1. Review of any AI's from call #10 on October 20th
- No outstanding action items.
2. Recap of Hyderabad Meeting
Recap by Steve DelBianco:
- Concerns expressed around the concept of Mutual Accountability Round-Table
- IRP applicability to SO/AC: very little interest, but some concern (too heavy weight, too complex).
- Notion of the word "effectiveness": little interest on this track too.
- SO/AC questionnaire: we'll need to nudge them to provide answers, which could be multi-layered for some
3. Next Steps in our Work Plan
- Methodology for review of replies to our Survey questions (from mid Dec)
- Questions reviewed and sent out while in Hyderabad.
- Need to identify who in this group is more familiar with each SO/AC to help interpret the answers.
- We could catalog mechanisms in place.
- Suggestion that a small subgroup be formed with expertise from each SO/AC to do an initial review.
- Volunteers:
- Steve (GNSO)
- Olga (GAC)
- Seun (ALAC)
- Michael (ASO)
ACTION: reach out to Giovani to see if he could help w/ ccNSO.
ACTION: Ask Thomas Rickert to help us identify volunteers for RSSAC & SSAC
- Suggestion to document the data captured.
- Graphical representation of data collected (Yes/No data collection)
- 3 general areas to organize the answers: Accountability, Transparency, Participation
ACTION (subgroup): meet and suggest way forward to organize the data capture by next week
ACTION (staff): support subgroup as necessary
- Use of IRP track - starting the discussion; we propose a briefing from IRP WT Chair at next call
- IRP was suggested in WS1 as a mechanism to end a dispute regarding SO/AC accountability.
- A tutorial on how the IRP works would not be relevant.
- Suggestion to bring in Ombudsman to get his point of view.
- Here is what the Bylaws say to us about IRP: "Assess whether the IRP would also be applicable to SO and AC activities."
- Assumption is that this would be an adaptation of the IRP, to evaluate violation of an organization's charter.
- Suggestion to review the CCWG proposal to see if more clarification can be found, else it would be up to the group to clarify.
- Jurisdiction and costs are significant issues for IRP, that would have to be tackled.
- Preparation for next report to CCWG and timeline adjustments required propose a small drafting team be formed
- Timeline presented. 1st draft of report should be drafted by early December, according to this timeline.
- Group agrees this timeline is too tight to be met.
ACTION (staff): move topic to track 1
- Suggestion to form a small drafting subteam to gather and start framing the report.
- 1st step could be to re-arrange the existing report.
ACTION (subgroup): form drafting subteam
- Suggestion to have a discussion early January to organize ourselves on the drafting.
- Suggestion to poll our subgroup participants on this topic ahead of that meeting.
- When and how to approach the matter of our mandate to discuss the Mutual Accountability Framework (as proposed for consideration in WS1) and any other Mutual Accountability Matters
- proposal to do a fresh write-up of what works and what doesn't about MAR
- Basic foundations for our required 'Enhancing SOAC Accountability Workplan'
Item moved to next meeting
- Our part in 2017 Public Comment documentation
- Item moved to next meeting
4. Next Meeting and future Meeting schedule
- Wednesday, 05:00 UTC
5. AOB and recap of any AI's
ACTION ITEMS
ACTION: reach out to Giovani to see if he could help w/ ccNSO.
ACTION: Ask Thomas Rickert to help us identify volunteers for RSSAC & SSAC
- Suggestion to document the data captured.
- Graphical representation of data collected (Yes/No data collection)
- 3 general areas to organize the answers: Accountability, Transparency, Participation
ACTION (subgroup): meet and suggest way forward to organize the data capture by next week
ACTION (staff): support subgroup as necessary
ACTION (staff): move topic to track 1
- Suggestion to form a small drafting subteam to gather and start framing the report.
- 1st step could be to re-arrange the existing report.
ACTION (subgroup): form drafting subteam
- Suggestion to have a discussion early January to organize ourselves on the drafting.
- Suggestion to poll our subgroup participants on this topic ahead of that meeting.
Documents Presented
Chat Transcript
Yvette Guigneaux:Welcome all to the SO/AC Subgroup Meeting #11 | Thursday, 17 November @ 19:00 UTC!
Farzaneh Badii:yes
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:welcome to GNSO Council, Cheryl
Olga Cavalli:Hello from Buenos Aires
Sivasubramanian M:hello
Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):Perhap mutually "accountability" is not the right notion - and we meant that we should strive for mutual understanding
Farzaneh Badii:Yes Jorge, others have also suggested other terms other than accountability
Alan Greenberg:Perhaps more important, mutual respect!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Opps my caffine deprived brain missed asking for anyone only on audio I will rectify next, Apologise received to the list will be noted
Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):In Hyderabad we had various conversations of this kind, but on a bilateral level - perhaps we may need them on a plurilateral one - which leads us to a cross-comm setting... although perhaps we would need some process etc
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):good way of looking at it Alan, and we can of course recommend any form of altente to the Willie Currie MAR model that encouages Mutualism respect understanding and sharings of practices... Yet to be discussed
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Excellent Jorge your bilaterals can make great contribution to our work in this track then :-)
Farzaneh Badii:a nonbinding roundtable of So/ACs for exchanging views
Tom Dale (ACIG GAC Secretariat):SO and AC Chairs meet regularly as necessary to coordinate issues requiring action, but those meetings are not documented. Perhaps we could consider building on that for general best practice updates, information exchange etc.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):All possible as outcome / recoommendations for the wder grou then Community to consider Yes Farzi
Farzaneh Badii:we definitely have to send a reminder
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Alan, Sevastien Sean all serve on the ALAC Steve
Olga Cavalli:GAC Olga can help
Farzaneh Badii:Giovanni from ccnso
Olga Cavalli:Mechanisms in writing could be useful
Olga Cavalli:Agree with Alan that SO and AC are very different
Farzaneh Badii:the mechanisms might be different , but ccountability criteria can be general and normative.
Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):+1 Alan...
Olga Cavalli:small sub team sounds ok
Olga Cavalli:+1 to Cheryl
Olga Cavalli:I can hel
Olga Cavalli:help
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:ByLaws ask us to do this: "(iii) Supporting Organization and Advisory Committee accountability, including but not limited to improved processes for accountability, transparency, and participation that are helpful to prevent capture;"
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:I can help with GNSO
Olga Cavalli:I volunteer from GAC
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:so we have 3 general areas: Accountability, Transparency, Participation
Olga Cavalli:welcome
Michael Abejuela (ARIN):not sure if I"m officially a member of this subgroup but happy to help with the ASO portion as needed
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Noted Michael and we don't discriminate
Olga Cavalli:not good audio :(
Julf Helsingius:Audio is really bad
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:cannot understand
Farzaneh Badii:yes Giovanni even proof read our report :)
Farzaneh Badii:and representation
Christopher Wilkinson:No objection. Support. CW
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:I recommend that we invite the new Ombudsman to join the IRP call.
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:@Alan -- here is what the Bylaws say to us about IRP: "Assess whether the IRP would also be applicable to SO and AC activities."
Farzaneh Badii:then the IRP scope has to be expanded
Sebastien (ALAC):Steve no pb to invite the Ombuds but I think the rapporteur of the IOO DT (ICANN Ombuds Office) maybe can help also?
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:Yes, Sebastien. Both, if possible
Olga Cavalli:big echo
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:Cannot understand CW at all
Olga Cavalli:I cannot understand :(
Julf Helsingius:Distortion
Farzaneh Badii:US does not have jurisdiction over IRP .
Julf Helsingius:Sounds like mic is too loud
Kavouss Arasteh:Farzaneh
Farzaneh Badii:IRP was convened in the first place to provide an alternative to US courts. what jurisdiction sub group might want to decide is what th Lex Loci and Lex Arbitri is going to be
Farzaneh Badii:Hello Kavouss.
Christopher Wilkinson:Correct. Jurisdiction and Costs are a significant issue for IRP.
Kavouss Arasteh:I suggest that you refrain to confirm or otherWISE us HAS or HAS NOT jurisdiction over IRP.
Kavouss Arasteh:tHIS IS NOT A MATTER THAT ccwg are eligible to advise.
Farzaneh Badii:well I shall correct myself. it does not have exclusive jurisdiction. it doesnt have now it doesn't have in the future. it's a matter of arbitration which should be discussed. I am not advising anyone. my opinion
Farzaneh Badii:Steve please go ahead
Kavouss Arasteh:We must ask for a circular from
Kavouss Arasteh:Legal ADVISE FROM OUTSIDE ICANN
Christopher Wilkinson:BTW, what are the questions that would be asked in the context of collecting Data?
Kavouss Arasteh:Whether or not US Coutrs has jurisdiction on
Olga Cavalli:Some of us we will be in the IGF so please take that in consideration for the timelline and small drafting team
Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):+1 Olga
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:True, Olga. Maybe we can get some of this work done while we are there in Mexico !
Kavouss Arasteh:Ihave not been connected yet
Farzaneh Badii:oh yes! I will be there too ...
Farzaneh Badii:(*IGF)
Sebastien (ALAC):I think all the items will end track 1
Kavouss Arasteh:I AM NOT CONN3E4CTED
Farzaneh Badii:yes ,,, :) I will
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:Sebastien -- are you thinking that Ombudsman will switch to track 1 ?
Sebastien (ALAC):Because with the review of the IOO that now IOO DT is in charge we will also move to track one (if not later)
Brenda Brewer:Calling you Kavouss.
Christopher Wilkinson:NOt wishing to take the time of the call, but i must confess that I do not understand the difference between Track 1 and Track 2.
Kavouss Arasteh:I AM NOT CONNECTED
Farzaneh Badii:I will not object :)
Olga Cavalli:Ok with Farzi!
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:@CW -- just look at the adobe. It's just a distinction of timeline
Sebastien (ALAC):@CW track one is more time than track 2
Kavouss Arasteh:THE TIME LINE IS TOTALLY MISLED MEM
Farzaneh Badii:yes Kavouss, it looks a bit unclear.
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:Willie Currie described MAR like this: "So one could imagine a Mutual Accountability Roundtable that meets once a year at the ICANN meeting that constitutes the annual general meeting. The form would be a roundtable of the Board, CEO and all supporting organisations and advisory committees, represented by their chairpersons. The roundtable would designate a chairperson for the roundtable from year to year at the end of each AGM who would be responsible for the next Mutual Accountability Roundtable. There could be a round of each structure giving an account of what worked and didn’t work in the year under review, following by a discussion on how to improve matters of performance. The purpose would be to create a space for mutual accountability as well as a learning space for improvement."
Farzaneh Badii:yeah that should be the google calendar fault
Farzaneh Badii:I got confused once myself.
Christopher Wilkinson:Okay … if I have well understood, then the Accountabiity should be on the same track as Jurisdiction and Transparency. CW
Christopher Wilkinson:Agree shift acc. to Track 1.
Farzaneh Badii:we have many comments on MAR . we can re-write what we have
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):thanks CW noted
Farzaneh Badii:I agree with Steve
Kavouss Arasteh:Cherylc
Steve DelBianco [CSG-GNSO]:that fresh writeup is what Farzi's drafting team would do in next several days
Kavouss Arasteh:May you put your proposal in written text with reasons
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):OK then let's set up a new write up then, aas a first reading and then I still want to get inut froom the WHOLE of our WT not just a small
Brenda Brewer:Next SO/AC Meeting: Wednesday, 23 Nov @ 05:00 UTC
Farzaneh Badii:thanks everyone. bye
Julf Helsingius:Thank you!
Michael Abejuela (ARIN):Thank you everyone
Olga Cavalli:thanks Cheryl!!
Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland):thanks and bye!
Nigel Hickson:bye; thanks
Andreea Brambilla:Thank
Sivasubramanian M:bye
Andreea Brambilla:*Thanks!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Bye all THANKS for the extra time today
