[NCUC-DISCUSS] Statement from Zuan Zhang (Peter Green) Complaint to Ombudsman

Wed Apr 19 10:46:27 CEST 2017

Just passing by.
Learning a lot from this case and discussion.
Thanks everyone for helping clarify the issue here.

------------------------
**Arsène Tungali**
Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international
<http://www.rudiinternational.org>*,
CEO,* Smart Services Sarl <http://www.smart-serv.info>*, *Mabingwa Forum
<http://www.mabingwa-forum.com>*
Tel: +243 993810967
GPG: 523644A0
*Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo*

2015 Mandela Washington Felllow
<http://tungali.blogspot.com/2015/06/selected-for-2015-mandela-washington.html>
(YALI) - ISOC Ambassador (IGF Brazil
<http://www.internetsociety.org/what-we-do/education-and-leadership-programmes/next-generation-leaders/igf-ambassadors-programme/Past-Ambassadors>
& Mexico
<http://www.internetsociety.org/what-we-do/education-and-leadership-programmes/next-generation-leaders/Current-Ambassadors>)
- AFRISIG 2016 <http://afrisig.org/afrisig-2016/class-of-2016/> - Blogger
<http://tungali.blogspot.com> - ICANN Fellow (Los Angeles
<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-07-18-en> & Marrakech
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/marrakech55-attendees-2016-03-14-en>
). AFRINIC Fellow (Mauritius
<http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1907-afrinic-25-fellowship-winners>)*
- *IGFSA Member <http://www.igfsa.org/> - Internet Governance - Internet
Freedom.

Check the 2016 State of Internet Freedom in DRC report
<http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=234>

2017-04-19 10:10 GMT+02:00 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>:

> David:
> The principle here is a fairly simple one (without discussing the
> procedural issues), that *even if representation is fully legitimate* an
> individual should not be active within two SGs.
>
> Wolfgang:
> 1++
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 19 Apr 2017, at 12:57 am, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.
> utoronto.ca> wrote:
> >
> > It seems pretty clear to me.  I would add that Peter was on duty at the
> CONAC booth while attending Marakech.  This is nothing personal, it is just
> important that we keep things clear and stick to the rules.
> >
> > Kind regards, Stephanie Perrin
> >
> > On 2017-04-18 12:08, Remmy Nweke wrote:
> >> James thanks for further efforts.
> >> Like you said this issue should come to a close.
> >> With the  aforesaid evidence there is nothing more to add.
> >> Regards?
> >> Remmy
> >>
> >> On 18 Apr 2017 16:26, "James Gannon" <james at cyberinvasion.net <mailto:
> james at cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
> >> In the interests of transparency I need to out myself as one of the
> initial complainants, Peter was clearly operating within ICANN as a
> representative of CONAC representing a registry and not as stated
> >>
> >>
> >> "My organization CONAC is a member of RySG and two colleagues of mine
> are serving as representatives of CONAC in RySG. I was not listed as a
> representative of CONAC in RySG at that time. The only fact is I am staff
> of CONAC"
> >>
> >>
> >> This can be verified by visiting https://community.icann.org/
> display/S1SF/Drafting+Team#DraftingTeam-CompositionandAttendance <
> https://community.icann.org/display/S1SF/Drafting+Team#DraftingTeam-
> CompositionandAttendance> where one will find,
> >>
> >>
> >> "Zuan Zhang - China Organizational Name Administration Center (CONAC)"
> >>
> >>
> >> listed under registries. Additionally this team was closed to all but
> contracted parties and the GAC as confirmed to me by Fabien from ICANN
> staff.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 01/09/2015, 17:07, "Fabien Betremieux" <fabien.betremieux at icann.org
> <mailto:fabien.betremieux at icann.org>> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >Hello James,
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> >Members of the Framework Drafting Team are either representatives of
> >>
> >> >Registry Operator, Registrars or Governments (GAC/PSWG). We don¹t have
> >>
> >> >a specific observer status for other members of the community at this
> >>
> >> >point of our developments (which started only recently).
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> >However, all developments of the Drafting Team are public. You will
> >>
> >> >find all available information on this workspace:
> >>
> >> >https://community.icann.org/display/S1SF/Spec+11+Security+
> Framework+Hom <https://community.icann.org/display/S1SF/Spec+11+Security+
> Framework+Hom>
> >> >e
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> >Let me know if you need any additional information.
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> >Best Regards
> >>
> >>
> >> So as a complainant to the former EC on this matter it is clear that
> one cannot represent one stakeholder group on the EC while actively
> participating as part of the RySG on closed ICANN policy processes. This is
> the clear difference vs Rafik for example. Also I will note Farzi serves as
> the formal NCUC liaison to the PIR advisory council, a position that comes
> with NCUC membership so I am not clear how an NCUC position could be
> considered in conflict with the NCUC?
> >>
> >>
> >> The former EC took the correct action here and has acted in a
> professional and integral manner, pointing out clearly the conflict of
> interest and asking Peter to resign which he did. I hope that everyone can
> agree that this situation almost 1 year on should be left to close now with
> Peter confirming that going forward he will be representing the RySG.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> James
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: Ncuc-discuss [mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:
> ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org>] On Behalf Of Herb Waye
> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 11:47 PM
> >> To: ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
> >> Cc: ombudsman <ombudsman at icann.org <mailto:ombudsman at icann.org>>
> >> Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Statement from Zuan Zhang (Peter Green)
> Complaint to Ombudsman
> >>
> >>
> >> Please find below a statement from Zuan Zhang (Peter Green). Attached
> is the initial request for his resignation and his response. This statement
> is in response to the statement posted by the former NCUC EC on April 10,
> 2017.
> >>
> >>
> >> Herb Waye
> >>
> >> ICANN Ombudsman
> >>
> >>
> >> https://www.icann.org/ombudsman <https://www.icann.org/ombudsman>
> >> https://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman <https://www.facebook.com/
> ICANNOmbudsman>
> >> Twitter: @IcannOmbudsman
> >>
> >>
> >> ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior:
> >>
> >> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/expected-
> standards-15sep16-en.pdf <https://www.icann.org/en/
> system/files/files/expected-standards-15sep16-en.pdf>
> >> Community Anti-Harassment Policy
> >>
> >> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/community-
> anti-harassment-policy-2017-03-24-en <https://www.icann.org/
> resources/pages/community-anti-harassment-policy-2017-03-24-en>
> >> Confidentiality
> >>
> >> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
> confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary
> to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not
> involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman
> shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the
> existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution
> of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary
> to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence
> and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential
> nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution
> of a complaint
> >>
> >>
> >> Comments from Zuan Zhang (Peter Green) on Former EC's Statement
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear NCUCers,
> >>
> >>
> >> From August, 2016 to April, 2017, it's been 8 months since I took the
> case of the former NCUC EC's decision to ask me to resign from office to
> the ICANN Ombudsman.
> >>
> >>
> >> Time to speak.
> >>
> >>
> >> I assume it is better to put all of the things on the table and would
> like to have the whole picture for our NCUC members to see the core of the
> case, the nature of the case.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1st, August, 2016, I received a letter (please see the attached
> Email 1) from the former NCUC EC asking me to resign. In the letter, the EC
> came to the conclusions that I was not eligible to be a NCUC member, I am a
> member of the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) and I actively
> participated in the work of RySG. Therefore, the EC decided to remove me
> from the office.
> >>
> >>
> >> I replied to the former EC acknowledging my receipt of the letter. Then
> I was silent for a few days and went back to hometown for family affairs.
> When I returned to work, there were discussions going on in the NCUC
> mailing list. I found that there were divergent views on my eligibility of
> being a NCUC member among many of our NCUC veterans, therefore I decided to
> take this case to the ICANN Ombudsman and I made it very clear that before
> the Ombudsman's decision, I would not take any action, hence long time
> silence (please see the attached Email 2).
> >>
> >>
> >> However, I could not imagine that the case had been going on for so
> long. There were several rounds of discussions among me, the Ombudsman and
> the former EC until Rafik published the former EC's Statement on Monday.
> >>
> >>
> >> After rounds of discussions, the former EC did not agree with some
> views of the Ombudsman. Therefore, the former EC released this Statement to
> clarify their action.
> >>
> >>
> >> Below are my comments on the former EC's Statement:
> >>
> >>
> >> 1. Issue of My Eligibility of Being a NCUC Member.
> >>
> >>
> >> I could not understand how the former EC had ever come to the
> conclusion that I was not eligible to be an NCUC member. I joined in
> NCSG/NCUC in March, 2013 as an individual member with registered domain
> names (one of them was expired, currently holding an IDN domain name?.???,
> xn--h84a.xn--6qq986b3xl)for non-commercial self-use in accordance with NCSG
> Charter and NCUC Bylaws. I could not see how I am not eligible to be an
> individual member of NCUC. However, the former EC claimed that I am a
> member of RySG. For your information, RySG only consists of organizational
> members-registries. My organization CONAC is a member of RySG and two
> colleagues of mine are serving as representatives of CONAC in RySG. I was
> not listed as a representative of CONAC in RySG at that time. The only fact
> is I am staff of CONAC. Does the fact that I am staff of CONAC and CONAC is
> a member of RySG mean that I am a member of RySG? That's clearly not the
> case in accordance with the RySG Charter. If it is not that case, I could
> not see why the former EC came to such a conclusion according to the NCUC
> Bylaws, if not with a preconceived notion that staff of a registry could be
> not individual members of NCUC, however, the NCUC Bylaws does not say so.
> >>
> >>
> >> On the other hand, in the Statement the former EC also mentioned that
> "[the former EC's] request for Peter to resign from the EC was not caused
> by any misconduct or poor performance on his part", "[the former EC's] main
> concern has always been the integrity of the NCUC", "[t]his is designed to
> prevent commercial or contracted parties from attempting to control or
> influence [NCUC] Constituency". I do agree with maintaining the integrity
> of NCUC. If the former EC's decision to remove me was not due to my
> misconduct rather due to my relationship with CONAC and CONAC's
> relationship with RySG, there are two other facts that deserve attention.
> Rafik now works for NTT Communications, a business company in Japan and
> Farzaneh is serving as a member on the Advisory Council of .org
> registry-PIR-a registry. According to the circumstances of my case, in
> order to preserve the integrity of NCUC and prevent commercial or
> contracted parties from controlling NCUC, does it mean that the NCUC EC
> should consider removing them from office due to their relationship either
> with a business company or with a registry, both of which are not committed
> to non-commercial interests.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2. Authority Issue
> >>
> >>
> >> It should be noted that the CURRENT EFFECTIVE NCUC Bylaws does not
> encompass terms or articles regarding removing an incumbent EC member, as
> it was mentioned in the former EC's Statement that "there was no precedent
> in NCUC's history for the EC to draw upon". Therefore, the former EC's
> action to remove me from office was not on basis of the NCUC Bylaws. There
> is a gap in the NCUC Bylaws.
> >>
> >> It is just owing to my case that NCUC found there is gap hence
> necessity to include removing an incumbent EC member in the revised NCUC
> Bylaws, see email on 14th, October, 2016 at http://lists.ncuc.org/
> pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-October/019237.html[lists.ncuc.org] <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-
> 3A__lists.ncuc.org_pipermail_ncuc-2Ddiscuss_2016-2DOctober_
> 019237.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=
> kIm7BGIl3qR3NKOfU-SwstwQr15K9OhllVGUWu0k8uc&m=
> kfPRSa6Hq7XVjsBTD1dYGMxfK7l5VIP7CJMsnltDDZw&s=9ClgqJhulZz6yY_
> JHgaWzghAeK0GuQZ9nwJwIfi4OKY&e=>, however, in his comment on the former
> EC's Statement, Professor Milton Mueller claimed that "[t]he approval of
> the new bylaws validates the actions of the EC by making it unambiguous
> that the NCUC has the right to remove from office people who are not
> eligible." Would you mind differentiating the relationship between cause
> and effect? Which is first? My case was before the former EC's intention to
> include terms of removing an incumbent EC member in the new NCUC Bylaws.
> Professor Milton is talking about the effect of the approval of the revised
> Bylaws. It seems Professor is talking about the other side of the coin.
> Unfortunately, two sides of a coin never meet each other. I hope any
> effective discussion should be on the same side of the coin.
> >>
> >>
> >> 3. Transparency Issue.
> >>
> >>
> >> The former EC sent me a letter asking me to resign and claimed that it
> was an EC decision. Were there any EC meetings or records? I was removed
> only due to email exchanges between members of the former EC, without
> documentation. Weren't there transparency issues? In this sense, it seemed
> that I was removed in a non-transparent way with non-legitimate EC
> authority (at the time the NCUC bylaws was not revised, even if the NCUC
> bylaws was revised, it is not effective now).
> >>
> >>
> >> With my comments, I aim to have the whole picture on the table for the
> NCUC members. I would not say the case is moot or not. All of us could
> comment.
> >>
> >>
> >> More importantly, I see that my case has helped eliminate ambiguities
> and gaps of the NCUC Bylaws, though it severely affected my work in
> NCSG/NCUC.
> >>
> >>
> >> Community integrity is important. Legitimacy and transparency is also
> important.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thank you all!
> >>
> >>
> >> Best Regards
> >>
> >> Zuan Zhang (Peter Green)
> >>
> >>
> >> (Note:
> >>
> >> 1. I would like to reiterate that I have no intention to participate in
> NCSG/NCUC because of the effect on me and I will unsubscribe from the
> NCSG/NCUC mailing list on 1st, May 2017.
> >>
> >> 2. Due to the effect of the case on me, after 8 months, in late March,
> I asked to join RySG and was listed as an alternate representative (without
> voting rights) of CONAC in RySG to start my ICANN journey. As I am still in
> this case, I have reported my action to the Ombudsman for record.)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> >> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170419/911fa5ca/attachment-0002.html>