Further Bylaw Changes Following Adoption of Revised Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Policy Development Process (PDP)
|Comment/Reply Periods (*)||Important Information Links|
|Comment Open:||10 February 2012|
|Comment Close:||2 March 2012|
|Close Time (UTC):||23:59 UTC||Public Comment Announcement|
|Reply Open:||Cancelled – No Comments||To Submit Your Comments (Forum Closed)|
|Reply Close:||View Comments Submitted|
|Close Time (UTC):||Report of Public Comments|
|Originating Organization:||ICANN Board|
|Categories/Tags:||ICANN Board / Bylaws, Policy Processes|
|Purpose (Brief):||In order to complete the documentation of the revised GNSO PDP, it is recommended that the ICANN Bylaws be modified to include the new threshold definitions. In addition, a small revision to Annex A of the ICANN Bylaws is recommended to require that public comment periods on PDP-related documents shall abide by the practices for public comment periods in effect within ICANN. A redline of the proposed Bylaws revisions is attached to this submission. The proposed revisions are put out for public comment prior to Board consideration of incorporating the revisions into the Bylaws.|
|Current Status:||The proposed changes to the ICANN Bylaws as a result of the revised GNSO PDP and the new practice for public comment periods are put out for public comment prior to Board consideration.|
|Next Steps:||The ICANN Board will consider the comments received as part of their deliberations on the proposed Bylaw changes.|
|Staff Contact:||Marika Konings||Email:||firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose|
Following the adoption of the revised GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) by the ICANN Board in December 2011, it is recommended that further changes are made to Article X, Section 3.9 of the ICANN Bylaws which sets out the voting thresholds that apply to a GNSO PDP. A number of new voting thresholds were introduced in the revised PDP, such as for the adoption of a PDP Charter, termination of a PDP and modification of approved PDP recommendations, which are recommended for addition to this specific section. Furthermore, a new definition of a GNSO Supermajority has been included as adopted by the GNSO Council on the recommendation of the PDP Work Team. In addition, following the adoption of new practices for public comment periods (see http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/), a small modification to Annex A of the ICANN Bylaws is proposed to ensure that these do not conflict with the practices for public comment periods in effect within ICANN.
|Section II: Background|
On 26 June 2008 the ICANN Board approved a set of recommendations designed to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy activities, structure, operations, and communications. The GNSO Improvements Report, approved by the Board, identified the following key objectives:
The Board emphasized the need to improve inclusiveness and representativeness in the GNSO's work while increasing its effectiveness and efficiency.
In furtherance of this effort, the GNSO Council recommended to the ICANN Board the adoption of a revised policy development process (PDP) as outlined in the Updated PDP Final Report [PDF, 1.51 MB]. The proposed Annex A to the ICANN Bylaws and the PDP Manual proposed in the Updated PDP Final Report attempt to achieve the goals established by the ICANN Board when it approved the restructure of the GNSO Council. The Board adopted the revised PDP at its meeting on 8 December 2011 and this revised PDP has now replaced the previous PDP defined in Annex A of the ICANN Bylaws. The revised PDP establishes voting thresholds for new parts of the PDP, and therefore revisions are proposed to Article X, section 3.9 of the ICANN Bylaws, where the applicable GNSO voting thresholds are defined. The Board directed ICANN Staff to open a public comment forum on the proposed revisions.
|Section III: Document and Resource Links|
Document posted for comment:
|Section IV: Additional Information|
(*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses.