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 <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> 
>> Speaking as EFA rep, I support signing.
>> 
>> David
>> 
>>> On 22 Oct 2018, at 8:46 pm, farzaneh badii
>>> <[log in to unmask]> 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