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

[farzaneh badii]

Thanks everyone for the support, we co-signed the letter.

Farzaneh


On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:52 PM AMADU YUSIF <yamadu at ug.edu.gh> wrote:

> I support signing
>
>
> Yusif Amadu
> eLearning Unit
> University of Ghana Computing Systems
> University of Ghana
> Cell: +233244659245
> Skype:  kooissi
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> on behalf of Hubert
> K. Foy (AFRICSIS Dir) <hfoy at AFRICSIS.ORG>
> *Sent:* 23 October 2018 15:09:12
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: Fwd: URGENT CO-SIGN request: Joint letter to Board on IRP
> Rules of Procedure
>
> I support signing.
>
> Hubert
>
> On 2018-10-23 08:34 AM, Razoana Moslam wrote:
> > As a NCUC member, I support signing...
> >
> > Best regards
> > Razoana Moslam
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Oct, 2018 at 10:22 AM, David Cake <dave at davecake.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Speaking as EFA rep, I support signing.
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >>> On 22 Oct 2018, at 8:46 pm, farzaneh badii
> >>> <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>
> >  --
> > Best Regards,
> > Razoana Moslam
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20181023/b65c856a/attachment.htm>