[gnso-osc-ops] FW: Conflicts of Interest and Proxy Voting - UPDATE
-----Original Message----- From: Ken Bour [mailto:ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 7:44 PM To: 'Ray Fassett' Cc: 'Robert Hoggarth'; 'Julie Hedlund' Subject: Conflicts of Interest and Proxy Voting - UPDATE Hi Ray: I just wanted you to know that it is unlikely that we'll have any new information from ICANN's Legal Department relative to our COI/Proxy/Absentions questions. We were admittedly late in getting the material to them, but it is now in their hands. Unfortunately, due to other pressing priorities, they have not had time to engage on it just yet as we had hoped. There is some new and, I think, bullish information that I want to share with you and, hopefully, the larger team tomorrow -- at your discretion. Since our last session, I located a 2007 document, authored by Liz Gasster and Dan Halloran (from Legal), that actually discusses the entire subject of "proxy" voting. I know that we were talking about vote "transfers" using "alternates"; but, the way we are actually describing the process, it is really "proxy" in a thinly veiled disguise. Also, "alternate" voting cannot work in the GNSO due to certain Bylaws requirements (e.g. no one other than a Councilor is permitted to vote). An "alternate" who is a Councilor is nothing more or less than a "proxy." If you will accept, for the moment, that what we are really asking for is, in effect, proxy voting, it's still not gloomy news. The 2007 document referenced above does not actually conclude that proxies are illegal or even ill advised. It only lays out certain conditions and requirements that must be met. After going through that paper carefully, I think we meet them all (or can -- see att'd). Given my renewed optimism, I took a shot at rewriting sections of the draft procedures to shore up a few areas mentioned in the 2007 document (attached as well -- redlined from our previous version so that you can see what new changes were made). Although it is a long shot that we will have a directional indication from Legal by our meeting start, there is this new information that we could discuss to bring the team up-to-date. On the other hand, if you think best at this stage, we could postpone the session or use the time for other GCOT matters. Thoughts? Ken Bour -----Original Message----- From: Ray Fassett [mailto:ray@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 1:03 PM To: 'Ken Bour'; gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx Cc: julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx; robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx; liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Abstentions and Conflicts of Interest] It appears to me we need ICANN Counsel advice on the concept of "transferring a vote" from one individual to another individual. I've been trying to reason out the issue from the perspective that "the Constituencies and/or SGs do, indeed, own/control their votes" on the thinking that this places accountability where it best belongs being at the SG/Constituency level (vs. at the Council level). I wonder if we should seek ICANN Counsel advice on this question too? i.e. Does the SG/Constituency own/control their own vote and does this have any significance to the concept of being able to transfer a vote from individual to another individual when various scripted conditions are met? Thoughts? [SNIPPED Thread] Attachment:
Proxy Voting-Staff & Legal Positions (2007) & KAB Annotations (KBv1).doc Attachment:
GNSO Ops Procedures-COI & Proxy Voting-REVISED REDLINE (KBv1).doc |