Fwd: [Fwd: ccPDP Input] (African region 2)

[BJ.Boswinkel@xxxxxxx]

Input received African Regional Representative 


Bart Boswinkel
Issue Manager 

Begin doorgestuurd bericht:

> Van: Ali Drissa BADIEL <badiel@xxxxxxxxx>
> Datum: 16 juli 2005 17:46:50 GMT+02:00
> Aan: Dr Paulos Nyirenda <paulos@xxxxxxxxxxx>, inne <sultane@xxxxxxxxx>, OUEDRAOGO PIERRE <Pierre.Ouedraogo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ccNSO@xxxxxx, "BJ.Boswinkel@xxxxxxx" <BJ.Boswinkel@xxxxxxx>, Chris Disspain <ceo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Onderwerp: [Fwd: ccPDP Input]
> Antwoord aan: badiel@xxxxxxxxx
>
> Dear All,
>
> Please find attached below some input I received from Michucki (.ke);
> there are slight differences of approach  with the input I provided to
> you a few days ago; anyway, you
> can consider both inputs.
>
>
> Looking forward to hearing from you soon.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Ali Drissa BADIEL                       Tel.: +226 33 88 71
> ccNSO Liaison for AfTLD            Fax : +226 30 74 14
> ONATEL/DINT/FasoNet           E-mail: badiel@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Van: Michuki Mwangi <michuki@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Datum: 14 juli 2005 10:23:56 GMT+02:00
> Aan: Ali Drissa BADIEL <badiel@xxxxxxxxx>
> Onderwerp: ccPDP Input
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Further to a mail sent out earlier in the week from Badiel requesting
> for input into the ccNSO PDP document and bylaws. I wish to move that we
> provide the input for discussion on this list. The deadline for input
> from all regions is 16th July 2005 less than a weeks time.
>
> IMHO, we ought to agree on some of the key issues on this list prior to
> handing over a final document to Badiel.
>
> To Start with, the following are my comments/input on the issues raised.
>
>
> > A-- Article IX 4.10 on ccNSO members by virtue of their membership
>
> Our proposal is to strike off the words "by virtue of their membership"
> from that statement.
>
> > C-- Article IX section 6 - Amendment of the by-law
>
> The ccNSO should propose amendments and changes to Annex B and C of the
> bylaws to the ICANN Board. If the Board feels that the amendments and
> changes are not in the best interests of the ICANN community, a response
> should be communicated to the ccNSO for further deliberation. Only
> changes and amendments proposed and consented by the ccNSO and its
> members should be implemented by the ICANN Board. 
>
> > E -- Can the ccNSO potentially set binding policies on its members on
> > activities not defined in Article IX section 1 but authorised by its
> > members?
>
> The ccNSO should not be in a position to set binding policies that have
> not been defined in the Article IX. Our proposal is that any ccNSO
> binding policy should be developed through the ccPDP and amendments or
> changes be made to the Article IX prior to implementation. This will
> lead to a insert to provide for change to the Scope of the Article IX.
>
> > F -- Changes to ccPDP and Scope
>
> The ccNSO should be able to change Article IX over time through a PDP.
> This will allow for the ccNSO to have ability to set up binding policies
> for its scope and members.
>
>
> > G -- Applicable law exemption
>
> With the existing diversities national laws that are applicable to
> respective ccNSO members in their countries, we are in favor of the
> insertion of a process that will set out the decision of not applying
> the conflicting policy.
>
>
> > H -- Initiating a ccPDP
>
> Matters outside the ccNSO should be presented to the members who would
> endorse or reject the matter based on relevance. If endorsed by the
> members through a voting process, the matter would then be formally
> brought forward for discussion through the PDP procedure.
>
> > I -- Membership quorum voting on PDP recommendations
>
> It is important to ensure quorum at all rounds of voting. However it is
> worth establishing that the 50% vote is representative of all the
> regions of the world. While this may complicate the voting process, it
> is bound to be an all inclusive vote. For instance, if Asia Pacific
> region abstained from the vote for specific region specific concerns,
> but the vote attains the 50% quorum, the vote would count regardless of
> the concerns. Considerations should be given for quorum in regional
> quota systems as deemed appropriate by the members. However, if the 50%
> can only be attained by at least a single vote from every region, then
> we uphold it as the minimum voting quorum percentage.
>
>
> > J -- Rejection of PDP recommendations by the ICANN Board
>
> The ICANN Board should only be able to reject a Recommendation. It is
> expected that the Supplemental Recommendation would have taken the
> Boards Statement into consideration. The Board should therefore approve
> of Supplemental Recommendations. If the Supplemental Recommendations are
> not voted through, the Board should introduce additional and alternative
> voting mechanisms to cater for such scenarios.
>
>
>
> -- 
> Michuki Mwangi
> KENIC.

>