[NCUC-DISCUSS] [info] Draft New ICANN Bylaws Posted for Public Comment

[Seun Ojedeji]

Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 22 Apr 2016 15:53, "Kathy Kleiman" <kathy at kathykleiman.com> wrote:
>
> As for me, I am shocked at the tremendous revision to the bylaws being
introduced.
> I had thought we were adjusting accountability, not rewriting ICANN's
structure.
>
SO: why am I surprised to read this. FWIW, the ship has sailed on the
substance of all these, what is to be looked into now is whether bylaw
changes is consistent with the various OC transition proposals and with
that of the accountability.

The changes that you see emerge in the bylaw now stem from what you and I
approved a long time ago. If we were not concerned then, we should not be
concerned now about the significant revisions introduced in the bylaw.

Regards

> - Kathy
>
>
> On 4/22/2016 10:50 AM, Matthew Shears wrote:
>>
>> + 1 Milton
>>
>> On 4/22/2016 3:44 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, Aarti, we are not able to change the basic proposal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> However, I wonder what would happen if someone discovers some major
“gotcha” that creates legal issues or some kinds of internal
contradictions. So the overall proposal must, I think, be assessed in terms
of its workability and not just in terms of its adherence to the CCWG
proposal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --MM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Ncuc-discuss [mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org] On
Behalf Of Aarti Bhavana
>>> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 3:20 AM
>>> To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] [info] Draft New ICANN Bylaws Posted for
Public Comment
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Rafik,
>>>
>>> The way I understand it, we are only looking at whether the bylaws
adequately reflect the principles in the final proposal, that the
chartering organisations agreed to. This does not involve a substantive
discussion itself, as that has been closed. However, if anyone thinks that
the articulation of the bylaws haven't quite captured the
accountability-enhancing recommendations agreed upon in the final proposal,
then this is the perfect place to raise these concerns.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Aarti
>>>
>>> On 22 Apr 2016 12:10 pm, "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am sharing here the announcement about public comment period for the
new ICANN bylaws challenges, which is part of the implementation for the
accountability proposals. as you know the the accountability work is still
ongoing starting with the so-called "workstream 2". it doesn't look like
when you read the announcement, but this is another important step to
implement accountability measures within ICANN.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> hope that those from NCUC involved in the CCWG can give some
background and explanations.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Original link: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-04-21-en
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Draft New ICANN Bylaws Posted for 30-day Public Comment
>>>>
>>>> Now that the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) and
Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability
(CCWG-Accountability) proposals have been transmitted to NTIA, one of the
key implementation planning items is to amend the ICANN Bylaws to reflect
the recommendations in those Proposals. The proposed draft of the New ICANN
Bylaws was developed collaboratively by the ICANN legal team and the
independent counsel hired to advise the CCWG-Accountability and the Cross
Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal
on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship). In developing the Draft New
ICANN Bylaws, the attorneys consulted a Bylaws Coordination Group populated
with both community and Board members, as well as with the CWG-Stewardship
and the CCWG-Accountability.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Both the independent counsel to the community groups and ICANN's
General Counsel have confirmed that the Draft New ICANN Bylaws are
consistent with the community proposals relating to the IANA Stewardship
Transition.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> These proposed draft Bylaws, are out for a 30-day public comment from
21 April – 21 May to allow any interested party to review and provide
feedback. This timeline allows for comments to be analyzed and incorporated
in time for a tentative 27 May adoption of the Bylaws by the ICANN Board.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NTIA has stated that it needs to see that changes to the Bylaws have
been adopted sufficient to implement the Transition Proposals before NTIA
can complete its review of the Transition Proposals. This public comment
period is designed to meet that deadline.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Link:
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-new-bylaws-2016-04-21-en
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
>> Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
>> E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20160422/477ae00f/attachment-0002.html>