URGENT CO-SIGN request: Joint letter to Board on IRP Rules of Procedure

[shahzad ahmad]

Kindly add the endorsement of Bytes For All, Pakistan as well.

Thanks and best wishes

Shahzad


--
Shahzad Ahmad
Country Director, Bytes for All, Pakistan
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/BytesForAllPakistan
Twitter: @bytesforall | @sirkup
Office Landline: +92 51 8437981 | Cell: +92 333 5236060
PGP Fingerprint: 1004 8FDD 7E64 A127 B880 7A67 2D37 5ABF 4871 D92F

> On Oct 23, 2018, at 1:50 PM, Ade Bo <adebodea at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> 
> 
> I also support signing
>> On 22 Oct 2018, at 22:01, James Gannon <james at CYBERINVASION.NET <mailto:james at CYBERINVASION.NET>> wrote:
>> 
>> I support us signing.
>> 
>>> On 22 Oct 2018, at 20:46, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com <mailto:farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> We received this from Malcolm. An issue that we were concerned and said in our public comment. Perhaps we can add our name quickly?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> As you may know, the IRP Implementation Oversight Team last week adopted
>>> "Interim Rules of Procedure" that include a deadline for filing of no
>>> later than 12 months after ICANN's action (rather than after anyone is
>>> affected by the action complained about).
>>> 
>>> I have just been told that these rules have been sent to the Board for
>>> approval on Thursday.
>>> 
>>> You will recall that this will deprive many potential claimants of the
>>> right to bring IRP cases, simply because ICANN's action is not
>>> implemented for 12 months and so nobody ever acquired the right to
>>> challenge it before the deadline expired.
>>> 
>>> Each of your constituencies (SG, for NCSG) wrote to oppose the adoption
>>> of this "right of repose" for ICANN in the first public consultation,
>>> and each of you (except IPC) wrote to welcome the team's decision to
>>> reverse itself in the public consultation August just passed.
>>> 
>>> I therefore assume you are as concerned as I am that the IOT has now put
>>> up these "Interim Rules" for approval, at ICANN Legal's request: the
>>> opposite of what was promised in the recent consultation!
>>> 
>>> While the IOT currently plans to "continue these discussions" once the
>>> interim rules are adopted, there must be a real risk that these "interim
>>> rules" become permanent, if only because ICANN and the Chair refuse to
>>> join a consensus to change them.
>>> 
>>> Most Board members have no clue this is controversial (or even that it's
>>> scheduled), and unless we intervene strongly it is likely to be nodded
>>> through on the consent agenda on Thursday. However, I have spoken to
>>> Matthew and Avri, so they are ready (and I believe supportive) should
>>> Cherine ask them if this should be deferred.
>>> 
>>> I have drafted a letter to Cherine warning him that these rules are
>>> incompatible with the Bylaws (see attached).
>>> 
>>> Will you CO-SIGN this letter on behalf of your constituency?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> P.S. This needs to go out urgently if it is to persuade the Board to
>>> drop this from the consent agenda. As tomorrow (Tues) is constituency
>>> day, I need your answer by the 5pm tomorrow.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Farzaneh
>>> <Letter to ICANN Board on IRP Interim Rules of Procedure 2018-10-22 draft 1.docx>
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20181023/44e6acd3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20181023/44e6acd3/attachment.sig>