Proposal in relation to the IGO Work Track

[farzaneh badii]

Hi Tomslin

Thanks for this.

The more I am reading this the more I get confused. Why do we need an EPDP
for the IGOs issues? Why can't we just wait until the RPM phase 2 starts?
Why didn't they wait? Their charter even says: "The* IGO Work Track will
work in parallel with ongoing work* in the RPM PDP, in accordance with the
timeline, work plan, deliverables and methodologies outlined in this
Addendum."

I am unclear what other policies they want to come up with or that they
need to come up with. According to the bylaws (Annex A-1), the EPDP has to
convene based on the following criteria
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#annexA1>:

[(1) to address a narrowly defined policy issue that was identified and
scoped after either the adoption of a GNSO policy recommendation by the
Board or the implementation of such an adopted recommendation; or (2) to
create new or additional recommendations for a specific policy issue that
had been substantially scoped previously such that extensive, pertinent
background information already exists, e.g. (a) in an Issue Report for a
possible PDP that was not initiated; (b) as part of a previous PDP that was
not completed; or (c) through other projects such as a GGP.]

I have read the document and I do not understand how this WT fulfills the
criteria for an EPDP. RPM phase 2 has not even started so which of these
criteria does it adhere to? My worry is, and this is a way international
orgs and governments function at ICANN, that they convened this group to
get what they couldn't otherwise get in the previous recommendations,
convened this group even before RPM phase 2 started and now we are looking
to accommodate them somehow. If what I am laying out is more or less
accurate, then I don't think this is an epdp and should be treated as such.



On Saturday, July 31, 2021, Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear members,
>
> I bring to your attention the proposal below, relating to the IGO Work
> Track which was established with the following charter [
> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/rpms-charter-addendum-09jan20-en.pdf
> ] and on the assumption that RPM Phase 2 work would have started shortly
> after completion of Phase 1 of the RPM PDP.
>
> The IGO WT is on track to deliver its initial report in September 2021.
> However, there are concerns that any forthcoming policy recommendations
> from the IGO Work Track will not have a procedural standing as the Work
> Track is currently orphaned and it is not known when RPM Phase 2 will
> start.
>
> With this in mind, the GNSO council leadership is proposing that to ensure
> that any forthcoming Consensus Policy recommendations from the IGO Work
> Track have proper procedural standing, an expedited PDP (EPDP) on IGOs be
> convened. Further, this EPDP should be convened with the same scope of work
> and structure as the IGO Work Track.
>
> Therefore, the Council leadership would like to know by 6 August 2021 (in
> 5 days time) if there are any objections to this proposal from NCSG.
>
> Please let us know what you think.
>
> Cheers,
> Tomslin
> @Twitter: https://twitter.com/tomsleen
> @LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tomslin/
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Mary Wong via council <council at gnso.icann.org>
> Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2021 at 02:19
> Subject: [council] PLEASE READ: Request from Council leadership in
> relation to the IGO Work Track
> To: council at gnso.icann.org <council at gnso.icann.org>
>
>
> SENT ON BEHALF OF THE GNSO COUNCIL LEADERSHIP TEAM
>
>
>
> Dear Councilors,
>
>
>
> Please review the request below from Philippe and the GNSO Council
> leadership team. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
> After the 22 July Council meeting, leadership has given additional thought
> to the agenda item regarding the IGO Work Track. As we discussed during the
> call, there were three components that we wanted to bring to your attention:
>
>
>
>    1. The need for a Program Change Request as a result of public comment
>    moratorium – there were no objections on the call.
>    2. *The ability of the IGO Work Track to develop Consensus Policy
>    recommendations – this is the area we will focus on for immediate next
>    steps.*
>    3. Whether the IGO Work Track’s draft recommendations are “generally
>    consistent” with the original IGO PDP Working Group’s recommendations #1-4
>    – to be addressed in the future.
>
>
>
> Council leadership considers #1 above as done and would like to consider
> #2 and #3 separately: #2 should be considered now and #3 can be considered
> at a later date.
>
>
>
> For #2, Council leadership has consulted with staff and, as a result, we
> request that the Council consider what appears to be the most sensible path
> forward to ensure that any forthcoming Consensus Policy recommendations
> from the IGO Work Track have proper procedural standing; viz., convene an
> expedited PDP (EPDP) on IGOs. Further, this EPDP should be convened with
> the same scope of work and structure as is currently outlined in the Addendum
> [gnso.icann.org]
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/rpms-charter-addendum-09jan20-en.pdf__;!!PtGJab4!qoFL48st4hQY6S6OUWdtwEIHG_wLhtwsiPZOB6JFhlUmAB4ZdQKI0PUXPG9ISxrgJGwmbio$>,
> to the greatest extent possible.
>
>
>
> What this would entail is: (1) preparing an EPDP initiation request; and
> (2) migrating the content of the Addendum to an EPDP Charter. *Please
> consult with your respective SG/Cs and note any objections to this proposed
> direction by 6 August 2021.*
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Philippe
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20210731/0faa3698/attachment.htm>