[NCSG-EL-REF] Gender and regional balance

[Tapani Tarvainen]

Dear election reformists,

Nobody commented this and as I just noted in ncsg-discussion it was
subsequently approved as is by NCSG EC.

I just realized, however, that there's at least one key element
missing that should be addressed before next election: GNSO Operating
Procedures allow for exception to the two-term limit under special
circumstances, including inability to fulfill gender or regional
balance otherwise.

While I don't see that having an impact in elections per se, what that
means is that in the event described in step 3 below, that is when
there're not enough candidates of one gender, the EC could appoint
someone who would not otherwise be eligible after having served two
terms already.

It could also apply in case of regional balance, cf. last sentence
in step 4 below.

But this is for the future, in current elections it doesn't seem
possible that a term-limited councillor would even be available
for this kind of scenario.

Tapani

On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 09:30:50AM +0200, Tapani Tarvainen via Election-reform (election-reform at lists.ncsg.is) wrote:
> 
> Our charter says (§3.1) that
> 
> "To the maximum extent possible, no more than two (2) NCSG GNSO
> Council Representatives can be declared resident of the same
> geographic region as defined by ICANN. Reasonable efforts should be
> taken to recruit nominees so that all geographical regions may be
> represented by the NCSG GNSO Council Representatives. Reasonable
> efforts should also be taken to ensure gender balance and in no
> circumstance should there be fewer than 2 members of any gender."
> 
> As I read it the balance requirements, in order of strength, are:
> 
> (1) no fewer then 2 of any gender;
> (2) no more then 2 of any region;
> (3) all regions should be represented;
> (4) genders should be balanced (3-3).
> 
> The first is given as an absolute. But if there aren't enough minority
> gender candidates at all, leaving a slot empty doesn't fulfill it any
> better. What we can do, however, is to make the imbalance as temporary
> as possible. There's no way in our charter to remove a councillor once
> elected, but same effect can be done by using temporary alternates:
> leave it to the EC to hunt down a minority gender alternate while
> appointing majority ones for only short periods in the meanwhile.
> 
> So, below's a draft procedure for managing balances and breaking ties.
> 
> ******
> 
> In council election:
> 
> 1. Candidates are sorted by vote count. If electing N first ones would
> not result in fewer than two representatives of either gender or more
> than two of any region in the council, they shall be elected.
> 
> 2. If there would be fewer than two of either gender, minority gender
> candidates shall be elected over majority gender ones until there'd be
> two of them in the council. If there're multiple minority gender
> candidates available, those satisfying the two-per-region limit shall
> be given first priority, then ones from otherwise non-represented
> regions, after that the ones with most votes.
> 
> 3. If there are not enough minority gender candidates to achieve the
> required minimum of two, their slots shall be left empty, to be filled
> by the Executive Committee with temporary alternate appointments, with
> the proviso that majority gender representatives may be appointed for
> a maximum of one month at a time until a minority gender one can be
> appointed.
> 
> 4. If there would be more than two of any one region and there are
> candidates from less-represented region, the slots over two for the
> overrepresented region shall go preferentially to a candidate from a
> region that has no representative at all, after that to one that has
> only one. More than two councillors from one region shall be
> acceptable only in case there are no candidates left from other
> regions.
> 
> 5. In event of a tie, minority gender and region shall be given
> priority as above until the requirement of at least two of each gender
> and at most two per region are satisfied. After that, priority shall
> be given to any otherwise non-represented region, then to minority
> gender representative. If tie still remains unresolved, winner shall
> be determined by lot.
> 
> 6. In case there are some 1-year and some 2-year slots to be filled,
> 2-year slots shall be given to those with most votes from the set
> determined by rules above.
> 
> ******
> 
> Comments, suggestions for improvement (including how to make the
> language simpler) would be most welcome. Note also that there are some
> points that could arguably be resolved differently; e.g., if we're
> faced with a choice of 3-3 gender balance but none from one region or
> 4-2 gender and all regions represented, these rules favour the latter.
> 
> -- 
> Tapani Tarvainen