[NCUC-DISCUSS] important information

Mon Aug 15 12:48:01 CEST 2016

Hi All!

Great to hear Peter Green's response.

I hoped to be properly clarified as I keep my fingers crossed.

Warm regards,

Sonigitu Ekpe

On 12 Aug 2016 2:46 p.m., "Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G." <crg at isoc-cr.org>
wrote:

> +1 Seun
> I look forward to the OMBUDSMAN´s analysis.
>
> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
> +506 8837 7176
> Skype: carlos.raulg
> Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica)
> On 12 Aug 2016, at 7:41, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>
> If what Peter writes here is a fact then i strongly suggest that EC
>> rethinks their approach of engaging. I encourage the Chair to subsequently
>> take further discussion about this off-list and communicate final decision
>> of the EC to the public.
>>
>> Regards
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Peter Green <
>> seekcommunications at hotmail.com
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> Sorry for responding late.  I have been kept away from any work for a few
>>> days due to my family affairs in far hometown.
>>> I was shocked by the wave of this public discussion here.
>>> Before I went home, I did acknowledge receipt of a Letter from the EC,
>>> which came as a complete shock.
>>> I did not know any investigation by the EC until I received the letter.
>>> What made me feel misery is that the letter does not include any word or
>>> any timeline to ask me to respond and  I do not know what to do, since
>>> the
>>> letter only asks me to resign.
>>>
>>> To be clear, I do not think I broke the rules regarding the eligibility
>>> of NCUC individual membership under current NCUC Bylaws.
>>> I do not accept any alleged claim that I broke it.
>>>
>>> Now that there have been such huge divergent views on this among many my
>>> respected NCUC veterans Milton, Bill, Kathy, Avri etc.
>>> I would not waste your time here. I ask for the ICANN Ombudsman to look
>>> into this. Let the Ombudsman judge.  I will take no further action until
>>> then.
>>>
>>> Thank you all.
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Peter Green
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *发件人:* Ncuc-discuss <ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org> 代表 Zakir Syed
>>> via Ncuc-discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>> *发送时间:* 2016年8月12日 6:51
>>> *收件人:* Rao Naveed Bin Rais; farzaneh badii
>>> *抄送:* ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> *主题:* Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] important information
>>>
>>> Thanks Naveed, thats a good point but IMHO, the focus here is not this
>>> particular case or any decisions that is made or going to be made. I
>>> believe our focus here is (as Stefania said) a much-needed assessment of
>>> our rules and our role.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Rao Naveed Bin Rais <naveedbinrais at gmail.com>
>>> *To:* farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>>> *Cc:* Zakir Syed <zakirbinrehman at yahoo.com>; "
>>> ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org"
>>> <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:14 PM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] important information
>>>
>>> I fully agree with the arguments made by Farzaneh.
>>>
>>> However, I just wonder if the violation was made recently or is it an old
>>> matter. As far as I remember, Peter has been serving the EC representing
>>> the AP region for around 3 years and anyways is not eligible to contest
>>> for
>>> the next elections on the EC seat.
>>>
>>> Naveed -
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:36 PM, farzaneh badii <
>>> farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Zakir,
>>>
>>> Initially, we sent a private message to Peter to resign. Why? Because we
>>> did not want Peter to be under public scrutiny. We had to make our email
>>> public because unfortunately we did not receive a response from Peter
>>> challenging us or resigning but we found out that other people have been
>>> informed. We did not want some of our members to know about the issue
>>> while
>>> others didn't hence had to announce it.
>>>
>>>
>>> We are the executive committee elected by the constituency  (not
>>> appointed) and we have to to make decisions. As to the procedural
>>> matters,
>>> first I have to say I stand up for the principles of procedural justice
>>> and
>>> have spent a long time working on them. But in this case, our members are
>>> voicing concerns about   procedural matters which are very important in
>>> many situations but in our situation, these procedural matters should be
>>> considered in light of the nature of our functioning and work. I have
>>> several remarks on this.
>>>
>>> We are not an adversarial body, we are an executive committee. While we
>>> have to observe the principles of procedural justice we can decide how we
>>> approach issues and make decisions and of course provide plausible
>>> rationales for those decisions. Not all procedural justice principles (I
>>> am
>>> adamant not to use due process, I think it's the wrong usage) apply to
>>> every situation. For example in the beginning, transparency would not
>>> have
>>> been in favor of Peter. But we had to make the matter public because
>>> Peter
>>> did not directly communicate with us.
>>>
>>>
>>> In the beginning, EC decided not to make the matter public(because of the
>>> reason I said above), communication took place between EC members
>>> (respected his privacy and maintained confidentiality), told Peter the
>>> basis of EC decision, one of the pillars of justice is to give reason for
>>> the decision , and requested him to resign from EC (which is pragmatic
>>> justice, clear instructions on what we wanted him to do).  Please note
>>> that
>>> nothing is final at this stage.
>>>
>>> You should also know that this issue was raised over a year ago when some
>>> of us were not on the Executive Committee and Peter was warned about
>>> this.
>>> We did not make a hasty decision.
>>>
>>> What I have also been hearing is whether Peter had the chance to provide
>>> evidence or defend himself. The decision to ask *Peter to resign from EC
>>> *(note
>>> that he was asked to resign from EC not NCUC) has been made primarily
>>> based on one fact that cannot be challenged nor defended: Peter is a
>>> full-time employee of a registry. Based on our interpretation of the
>>> bylaws
>>> and considering other matters such as the integrity of our constituency
>>> we
>>> decided that Peter should *resign from EC. *
>>>
>>> Some may dispute our decision and  might disagree that the fact that
>>> Peter
>>> works for a registry and is in a leadership role at NCUC do not hamper
>>> our
>>> integrity. I think it is necessary for us to discuss things with our
>>> members and inform them of the decisions which I have tried to actively
>>> do
>>> and we need to listen to our members and members should be able to
>>> challenge us. However, in the end, EC has to make a decision. At the
>>> moment
>>> the mechanism to challenge and hold the EC accountable as Milton said is
>>> through elections. If the majority of members are concerned with the way
>>> EC
>>> makes decisions then they can vote against them. If it gets to the point
>>> that members do not see elections as a sufficient tool or optimal, some
>>> other measures maybe considered.
>>>
>>> EC should and we try our best to take fair decisions.
>>>
>>> The next step for us (EC) is to have a meeting with Peter. This meeting
>>> will be transcribed and notes will be taken.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11 August 2016 at 02:31, Zakir Syed <zakirbinrehman at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Farzaneh, Thanks for that info.
>>> Was wondering, why not to wait for a response from Peter first.
>>> Just if Peter resigns (he has not - as you said) the Article VII will do.
>>> But if, there is a response/explanation from Peter and no resignation, I
>>> don't think the Article VII will do. I could be wrong though. Also, what
>>> is
>>> going to be the tool for taking the "next steps". I mean, do we have
>>> anything for such a scenario in the bylaws? If not, what happens.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Zakir
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>>> *To:* KASWESHA <kaswesha at gmail.com>
>>> *Cc:* "ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org" <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>> *Sent:* Monday, August 8, 2016 3:52 PM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] important information
>>>
>>> Dear Kaswesha,
>>>
>>> Let me clarify that we have requested Peter to resign from NCUC EC but
>>> Peter has not resigned yet, so we are yet to take the next steps.
>>>
>>> NCUC Bylaws have predicted processes in case of a member leaves office
>>> (Article VII) .According to Article VII(section E), as we have less than
>>> 6
>>> months to the EC elections, no early elections are needed and the chair
>>> may
>>> appoint a temporary replacement.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>> On 8 August 2016 at 12:05, KASWESHA <kaswesha at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Noted Rafik. Does this mean we have a by-election to replace Peter? Or
>>> How
>>> does work?
>>>
>>>
>>> James Njoroge
>>>
>>> *Cell-Phone +254 722 212171 or +254 721 274273*
>>>
>>> Before printing this mail make sure it is completely necessary. THE
>>> ENVIRONMENT IS EVERY ONE'S BUSINESS.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear members:
>>>
>>> I am sharing with you an important and extraordinary announcement. Last
>>> week the NCUC EC agreed to ask one of its members, Peter Green, to
>>> resign.
>>> It was not an easy act or one that we took lightly, and we had to think
>>> about it for some time. Our action was necessary because of an undeclared
>>> conflict of interest and a clash with our membership eligibility rules.
>>>
>>> Peter is an employee of CONAC, a TLD registry associated with the
>>> government of China. As a CONAC employee, he is an active member of and
>>> participant in the Registry Stakeholder Group. It has been a longstanding
>>> principle of NCUC membership eligibility rules that people or
>>> organizations
>>> that are members of another SG or constituency in the GNSO cannot also be
>>> members of NCUC (bylaws III.3). This is done to prevent other interest
>>> groups from attempting to control or unduly shape our Constituency, which
>>> is devoted to noncommercial user interests.
>>>
>>> Peter has been actively working on behalf of the Registry SG for some
>>> time, even as he has been serving on our Executive Committee. This is
>>> evident from articles such as this
>>> http://www.chinagov.cn/english /News/CONACNews/201509/t201509
>>> 24_281168.html
>>> <http://www.chinagov.cn/english/News/CONACNews/201509/t20150
>>> 924_281168.html>
>>> and from records of the registry constituency working group such as this
>>> https://community.icann.org/di
>>> splay/S1SF/Drafting+Team
>>> <https://community.icann.org/display/S1SF/Drafting+Team>
>>> We note with concern that Peter's Conflict of Interest statement when
>>> running for election to the NCUC EC failed to mention his employment at
>>> CONAC.
>>>
>>> I wanted you to be aware of this issue and to understand the basis for
>>> our
>>> actions.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Rafik Dammak
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>
>>> Dear Peter (Zuan Zhang):
>>> For some time we (the undersigned representatives of the Executive
>>> Committee) have received complaints or expressions of concern about your
>>> eligibility for membership in the Noncommercial Stakeholders Group. The
>>> EC
>>> has investigated this matter and has come to the conclusion that you are
>>> ineligible for NCSG membership and thus must resign from the NCUC
>>> Executive
>>> Committee immediately.
>>> We want to make it clear that this is not caused by any misconduct on
>>> your
>>> part; it is purely a matter of applying our eligibility rules. Your
>>> contribution to our EC has been exemplary, but we cannot continue to
>>> contradict our membership rules. This would open the door to many other
>>> ineligible members and possible abuses. We hope you can accept this
>>> decision in a good spirit.
>>> Section 2.2.2 of the NCSG charter specifically excludes from membership
>>> "Organizations that are represented in ICANN through another Supporting
>>> Organization."
>>> Section 2.2.5 of the NCSG charter makes it clear that individuals are
>>> eligible only if they are "not represented in ICANN through membership in
>>> another Supporting Organization or GNSO Stakeholder Group."
>>> As an employee of CONAC, you are a member of the Registry stakeholder
>>> group and have played an active role representing CONAC in the Registry
>>> Stakeholder Group (RSG). CONAC is a domain name registry, which has its
>>> own
>>> Stakeholder Group, where your affiliation with CONAC as an employee is
>>> persistent and strong. We understand that before CONAC was a TLD
>>> registry,
>>> its employees were admitted into NCSG because there was no other place
>>> for
>>> them to be represented and there was less of a conflict of interest. But
>>> that time has passed; CONAC is now a full-fledged TLD registry operator
>>> and
>>> its policy interests are represented in the RSG.
>>> We thank you for your prior participation in our group and encourage you
>>> to stay involved in the GNSO via the Registry Stakeholder Group.
>>> Farzaneh Badii
>>> Caribe Joao Carlos
>>> Rafik Dammak
>>> Grace Githaiga
>>> Milton Mueller
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>> <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
>>> <http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>> <http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>> <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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:
>> http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
>> <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
>> <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
>> <seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
>>
>> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160815/239d7623/attachment-0002.html>