[PC-NCSG] Fwd: [council] FW: CCWG-Accountability WG proposal for a Limited Scope of the ATRT3 Review

[Stephanie Perrin]

I think this one is important guys, how do we feel about this?

cheers sp



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[council] FW: CCWG-Accountability WG proposal for a Limited 
Scope of the ATRT3 Review
Date: 	Thu, 8 Dec 2016 19:59:44 +0000
From: 	James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com>
To: 	GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>



Councilors ?

Please see the letter below from the CCWG-ACCT Co-Chairs.

As we previously discussed, the scheduled reviews of RDS / WHOIS are 
colliding with existing policy development and implementation work, 
which could potentially lead to two groups examining the same issues and 
also drawing from the same pool of volunteers. Staff and the Community 
have kicked off a proposal to limit the scope of the RDS/WHOIS Review 
Team, and the GNSO is providing feedback (thank you, Susan & Keith!)

And now the CCWG-ACCT Co-Chairs are raising similar concerns regarding 
the third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3), which 
expected to launch in 2017.  They?ve identified 6 of 9 CCWG-ACT 
Workstream 2 topics as potentially colliding with this scheduled 
review.  As a result and following conversations with the Board, the 
CCWG-ACCT leadership is asking that all SO/ACs consider a ?limited 
scope? for ATRT3 that focuses on reviewing the implementation & 
effectiveness of the previous (ATRT2) review.  They are asking for our 
feedback and support on this proposal.

Please take a look at the full letter below, and let?s start a 
conversation on the list and leave the door open for a Discussion Item 
during our next call on 15 DEC.

Thanks ?

J.

*From: *Mathieu Weill mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>

*Date: *Friday, December 2, 2016 at 4:07 **

*Subject: *CCWG-Accountability WG proposal for a Limited Scope of the 
ATRT3 Review

Dear SO & AC Chairs,

The CCWG-Accountability (CCWG) at its face to face meeting at the ICANN 
56 in Helsinki considered the implications of the collision of topics, 
and therefore efforts, between ATRT3 and Work Stream 2 (WS2) (please see 
Annex 1 for a detailed consideration of this issue).

In its discussion of this issue the CCWG considered the following points:

?Collision of topics between WS2 and ATRT3 - There is potential for 
significant overlap between WS2 topics and the scope of ATRT3 as 6 of 
the 9 WS2 topics are accountability and transparency issues ATRT3 could 
also consider.

?Timing of the two activities - WS2 began in July 2016 with an objective 
of completing its work by the end of 2017. ATRT3, which is expected to 
take 12 months to complete, is currently scheduled to begin in January 
2017 but could potentially be delayed until February 2018 under the new 
Bylaws (which require ATRT every 5 years versus the AoC requirement for 
every 3 years). It would seem inefficient, at best, to have both of 
these activities working on the same topics independently, while drawing 
on the same pool of community volunteers. At worst, ATRT3 and WS2 groups 
could issue recommendations that are conflicting or duplicative.

?Implementation of recommendations ? The Bylaws for WS2 give CCWG 
recommendations greater weight when it comes to board consideration, 
relative to recommendations from an ATRT organized under the AoC.

While in Helsinki, the CCWG concluded its preferred approach, as 
communicated in our 8-Aug-2016 letter 
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/sanchez-et-al-to-icann-board-08aug16-en.pdf> 
to the Board of ICANN:

Convene ATRT3 as soon as possible with the limited scope of assessing 
implementation of ATRT2 recommendations. Allow WS2 to handle new 
recommendations for accountability and transparency. The fourth ATRT 
would convene before 2022 and would assess all accountability and 
transparency topics and make recommendations

The ICANN Board replied 
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/crocker-to-sanchez-et-al-24oct16-en.pdf> 
to the CCWG letter on 24-Oct-2016, saying,

It is not up to the Board to dictate the scope of this important 
community review. While we share the concerns raised of avoiding 
duplication of resources, it is essential that the broader ICANN 
community have a voice in determining how the ATRT3 should be scoped in 
alignment with the Bylaws. The Board and the ICANN Organization stand 
ready to support the community?s direction.

Accordingly, the CCWG is now proposing to community leadership the 
following approach:

?Requesting that the SO/AC leadership select (following the new Bylaws) 
a small group of review team members that have either participated in or 
closely tracked ATRT2.

?Requesting the ICANN organization to do a "self-assessment" reporting 
on a) the extent to which each recommendation was followed and/or 
implemented; b) the effectiveness in addressing the issues identified by 
ATRT2; and c) the need for additional implementation.

?Specifically request that the Review Team exclude the issues that are 
already covered by the CCWG-Accountability WS2 (see Annex 1).

?Suggesting that the work be conducted & completed more quickly than 
normal, such as asking that the Final Report be issued within six months

If the suggested approach above is agreeable to SO/AC community, the 
next steps would be:

?SO/AC leadership to issue a public statement or a letter to ICANN CEO 
and Board Chair that explains why limited scope is appropriate and 
articulates that they have broad support of the ICANN community

?Call for Volunteers to note limited scope & unique expertise sought

?Reach out to previous ATRT Review Team members and encourage them to 
apply for the narrowly-scoped ATRT3 Review Team

?Propose a Charter for the ATRT3 Review Team to adopt that tracks the 
limited Scope

Best regards,

Thomas Rickert, Leon Sanchez & Mathieu Weill

CCWG-Accountability Co-chairs

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20161208/54baf3d1/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CCWG-Accountability-WS2-ATRT3 Letter To SOACs.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 951325 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20161208/54baf3d1/attachment-0001.pdf>