<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">I caught a couple of
typos, but it seems like a good idea. Redlined version
attached.</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande"></font></font>Stephanie
Perrin<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2018-10-22 20:46, farzaneh badii
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAN1qJvCMi_hzn=7T7n=JXxSzS1na0iyNBMBjuRC5i5eifiPKng@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>
<div dir="auto">We received this from Malcolm. An issue that we
were concerned and said in our public comment. Perhaps we can
add our name quickly?</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
As you may know, the IRP Implementation Oversight Team last
week adopted<br>
"Interim Rules of Procedure" that include a deadline for
filing of no<br>
later than 12 months after ICANN's action (rather than after
anyone is<br>
affected by the action complained about).<br>
<br>
I have just been told that these rules have been sent to the
Board for<br>
approval on Thursday.<br>
<br>
You will recall that this will deprive many potential
claimants of the<br>
right to bring IRP cases, simply because ICANN's action is not<br>
implemented for 12 months and so nobody ever acquired the
right to<br>
challenge it before the deadline expired.<br>
<br>
Each of your constituencies (SG, for NCSG) wrote to oppose the
adoption<br>
of this "right of repose" for ICANN in the first public
consultation,<br>
and each of you (except IPC) wrote to welcome the team's
decision to<br>
reverse itself in the public consultation August just passed.<br>
<br>
I therefore assume you are as concerned as I am that the IOT
has now put<br>
up these "Interim Rules" for approval, at ICANN Legal's
request: the<br>
opposite of what was promised in the recent consultation!<br>
<br>
While the IOT currently plans to "continue these discussions"
once the<br>
interim rules are adopted, there must be a real risk that
these "interim<br>
rules" become permanent, if only because ICANN and the Chair
refuse to<br>
join a consensus to change them.<br>
<br>
Most Board members have no clue this is controversial (or even
that it's<br>
scheduled), and unless we intervene strongly it is likely to
be nodded<br>
through on the consent agenda on Thursday. However, I have
spoken to<br>
Matthew and Avri, so they are ready (and I believe supportive)
should<br>
Cherine ask them if this should be deferred.<br>
<br>
I have drafted a letter to Cherine warning him that these
rules are<br>
incompatible with the Bylaws (see attached).<br>
<br>
Will you CO-SIGN this letter on behalf of your constituency?<br>
<br>
<br>
P.S. This needs to go out urgently if it is to persuade the
Board to<br>
drop this from the consent agenda. As tomorrow (Tues) is
constituency<br>
day, I need your answer by the 5pm tomorrow.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"
data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Farzaneh </font></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>