Attendees: 

Sub-group Members:   Alberto Soto, Avri Doria, Carlos Vera, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Chris LaHatte, Farzaneh Badii, Herb Waye, Jose Arce, Karel Douglas, Mike Silber, Robin Gross, Samantha Eisner, Sebastien Bachollet, Sivasubramania Muthusamy, Susan Payne   (15)

Staff:  Anne-Rachel Inne, Bernie Turcotte, Brenda Brewer, Elizabeth Andrews, Laena Rahim, Trang Nguyen

Apologies:  Asha Hemrajani

**Please let Brenda know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**

Transcript

Recording

Agenda

  1.  Call Admin and Roll Call / Apologies (2 min Staff)
  2. Welcome – Opening Remarks (3 min SBT)
  3. Presentation of the Ombuds Office by Herb Waye & Chris LaHatte (20-30 min)
  4. Q & A (20-30 min)
  5. Next Meeting & AOB (5 min)

Notes

1.  Call Admin and Roll Call-Apologies

  • Apologies from Asha Hemrajani.

2.  Welcome – Opening Remarks

  • Sebastien Bachollet: Single topic call - back to regular work on the next call. I will produce a document for our next meeting.

3.  Presentation of the Ombuds Office by Herb Waye & Chris LaHatte

  • Herb Waye: running through the presentation (see wiki for presentation). slide topics: Independence (reports to the Board! Should be named by the Board or the NomCom?), Neutrality and Impartiality (there may be a role for the office for equality among groups or give a voice to smaller groups?), Confidentiality (releasing strings of emails can be an issue),  Informality (two extremes - cocacola no records, ICANN tracking system), Challenges (more formal makes it more legalistic, more complex and requiring more resources - hope we can get less formal), Future (Ombuds role in policy? maybe ensuring all parties are given a voice - possibly, should have a role for ethics and a code of conduct), Priorities for my new role as Ombuds (in-reach to community, give a voice to everyone and advocate for ethical behaviour), Interaction (how should the Ombuds interact with the other mechainisms in ICANN?)
  • Chris LaHatte: We have to be clear on the concept that an Ombuds is a mediator and not a decision maker as some are suggesting in the chat (see below) - this would completely miss the point. The Ombuds can only suggest they can never tell anyone to do anything - which is why informality is so important.

4.  Q & A

  • Sebastien Bachollet: Any questions not put in the chat? No - closing comments from HW.
  • Herb Waye: Hope this will spur discussion and want to state that we wish to work with this group to help it along.

(Note: Below are all chat inputs)

  • Sivasubramanian M 2: Sebastien,  I have a certain conflict of interest in participating in this specific sub-group. I would submit a revised SOP to WS2, repeating information about the conflict of interest, also stating that my participation is in the broader interest.
  • Sivasubramanian M 2: Q to the Ombudsman:   Did the Ombudsman mention a "contract",  is the Ombudmsan a contracted functionary in ICANN?  Does the framework of a "contract" fit into the stature of this office?  2.  In examining "independance" it is also pertinent to examine the 'position' of the Ombudsman - how the Ombudman is placed in the ICANN organizational structure. Herb Waye: yes a contract. The second question is for this group.
  • Sivasubramanian M 2: Q:  Why isn't the process of the Ombudsman an appeal process?  Why these limitations?  Why only the process?  This is the electronic equivallent of reading meta tags without going into the content.
  • jose arce: in small issues would not be a problem having a hire Ombudsman. but what happend in important isuues that involved ICANN's interest? would be better to have an dispute resolution office integrated with volunteers of the community, maybe appoinyñt3d by the NONCOM?
  • Mike Silber 2: the ombud could refer to a review /appeal process on behalf of the community is profound unfairness is found
  • Mike Silber 2: *if*
  • jose arce:  just thinking quikly I think that depend on the objetivies and the funtions of the office. @Siva agree with the variation
  • Chris LaHatte: +1 Mike and Farzanah
  • Sivasubramanian M 2: Q:  Does the discussion on "informality" arise from existing documented conventions? Or is this a new topic introduced from this point? 
  • Sivasubramanian M 2: @ MIke Agree that the notion of a 'bench' is akin to that of an IRP. But the key difference between an IRP and a bench of Ombudsman is that the bench would be an internal bench, that would act an internal and fair manner, and minimise the need for ICANN and other parties to seek external mediation.
  • Sivasubramanian M 2: and limit the need to go to court
  • Mike Silber 2: disagree completely. implies differences between individuals. the office should be consistent
  • Mike Silber 2: it is not a decision maker between adversaries.
  • Chris LaHatte: Ombuds is a facilitator not a decision maker
  • Chris LaHatte: mediation is our tool, which builds on decisions of the parties, not the Ombuds
  • Farzaneh Badii: Chris, Herb, I think we need to explain clearly the difference between ombuds and other dis res mechanisms
  • Farzaneh Badii: when we discuss informality we are going to discuss process. we are not going to talk about formality of outcome.
  • Farzaneh Badii: in my opinion
  • Mike Silber 2: Farzaneh +1

5.  Next Meeting & AOB

  • Sebastien Bachollet: Adjourned - talk next week.

Documents Presented

Chat Transcript

Brenda Brewer:Good day all and welcome to the WS2 Ombudsman Subgroup Meeting #3 on 22 August 2016 @ 19:00 UTC!

  Herb Waye:Hi Brenda

  Chris LaHatte:morning all

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:hello all

  Chris LaHatte:I am distracted, my daughters boyfriend proposed to her yesterday so I am to be father of the bride

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Hi all

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:Congrats

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):WOW  Congratulations  Chris!

  Farzaneh Badii:hi

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:I hope?

  Chris LaHatte:thanks!

  Herb Waye:Congrats Chris

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:But you are going to be fair and impatial about this  - right Chris ;-))

  Chris LaHatte:he's a great guy!

  Alberto Soto:Hello everyone!!

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Hi Seb

  Chris LaHatte:loud and clear

  Sivasubramanian M 2:Sebastien,  I have a certain conflict of interest in participating in this specific sub-group. I would submit a revised SOP to WS2, repeating information about the conflict of interest, also stating that my participation is in the broader interest.

  Mike Silber:apologies from Asha

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:My bad apologies

  Sivasubramanian M 2:Q to the Ombudsman:   Did the Ombudsman mention a "contract",  is the Ombudmsan a contracted functionary in ICANN?  Does the framework of a "contract" fit into the stature of this office?  2.  In examining "independance" it is also pertinent to examine the 'position' of the Ombudsman - how the Ombudman is placed in the ICANN organizational structure.

  Avri Doria:apologies for tardiness

  Sebastien (ALAC):Welcome Avri

  Sivasubramanian M 2:Thank you Mr Waye.  Apolgies if the questions interrupted your presentation, the questions weren't meant to, I was merely leaving them on the window for you to answer at your convenince.

  Sivasubramanian M 2:Q:  Why isn't the process of the Ombudsman an appeal process?  Why these limitations?  Why only the process?  This is the electronic equivallent of reading meta tags without going into the content.

  Farzaneh Badii:siva a nonbinding decision does not normally have an appeal process because it is a nonbinding decision.

  jose arce:in small issues would not be a problem having a hire Ombudsman. but what happend in important isuues that involved ICANN's interest? would be better to have an dispute resolution office integrated with volunteers of the community, maybe appoinyñt3d by the NONCOM?

  Mike Silber 2:would that not create a conflict issue, Jose?

  Sivasubramanian M 2:@jose..   A variation of this idea would be to expand the Ombudsman from one Ombudsman to a Bench, one (picked) appointed by the Board, one independantly appointed by the community, and a third by a nuetural process, paid by ICANN without conditions to be dependant beneath ICANN, but constitued to be neutral.

  Mike Silber 2:that misses the distinction between ombud and review /appeal

  Farzaneh Badii:yes .agree with Mike. there are other mechanisms in place to do that

  Farzaneh Badii:ombuds has to be simple and efficient

  Mike Silber 2:the ombud could refer to a review /appeal process on behalf of the community is profound unfairness is found

  Mike Silber 2:*if*

  jose arce: just thinking quikly I think that depend on the objetivies and the funtions of the office. @Siva agree with the variation

  Chris LaHatte:+1 Mike and Farzanah

  Sivasubramanian M 2:Q:  Does the discussion on "informality" arise from existing documented conventions? Or is this a new topic introduced from this point?  

  Alberto Soto:I'm sorry, I must leave the meeting, greetings!

  Sebastien (ALAC):Gracias Alberto

  Sivasubramanian M 2:@ MIke Agree that the notion of a 'bench' is akin to that of an IRP. But the key difference between an IRP and a bench of Ombudman is that the bench would be an internal bench, that would act an internal and fair manner, and minimise the need for ICANN and other parties to seek external mediation.

  Sivasubramanian M 2:and limit the need to go to court

  Mike Silber 2:disagree completely. implies differences between individuals. the office should be consistent

  Mike Silber 2:it is not a decision maker between adversaries.

  Chris LaHatte:Ombuds is a facilitator not a decision maker

  Chris LaHatte:mediation is our tool, which builds on decisions of the parties, not the Ombuds

  Farzaneh Badii:Chris, Herb, I think we need to explain clearly the difference between ombuds and other dis res mechanisms

  Farzaneh Badii:when we discuss informality we are going to discuss process. we are not going to talk about formality of outcome.

  Farzaneh Badii:in my opinion

  Mike Silber 2:Farzaneh +1

  Mike Silber 2:might be worth sending out a reading list?

  Mike Silber 2:https://www.ombudsassociation.org/Resources/Frequently-Asked-Questions/What-is-an-Organizational-Ombudsman.aspx

  Mike Silber 2:gives a nice intro

  Carlos Vera - Isoc Ecuador:saludos desde Ecuador

  Chris LaHatte:+1 again to Mike and Farzaneh

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):thanks  bye for now...

  Farzaneh Badii:h

  Farzaneh Badii:can I make a comment!

  Farzaneh Badii:ok bye

  Avri Doria:bye, thanks

  jose arce:bye

  Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:bye all

  Farzaneh Badii:I will make it to the list :) bye all

  Herb Waye:THank you all


  • No labels