Second NomCom Organizational Review: Difference between revisions

Line 63:

The [[SSAC]], [[ISPCP]], and [[NCSG]] submitted written comments to the NomCom2 listserv.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/2018-February/date.html NomCom2 Listserv Archive], February 2018</ref> The SSAC echoed the concerns expressed in the consultation call, that the NomCom might not be currently be capable of complying with the new commitments imposed by the IANA transition.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180216/d8d30613/SSAC2018-03-NomcomReviewAssessmentReportFINAL-0001.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - SSAC Comments to Assessment Report] February 15, 2018</ref> The ISPCP took issue with the assessment methodology, and had a variety of objections to the findings in the report.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180202/b7c769ed/ICANNCommentsonNomComReviewAssessmentReport-201802.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - ISPCP Comments to Assessment Report], February 1, 2018</ref> The NCSG, by contrast, agreed with much of the report and emphasized the imbalance of representation both in terms of diversity and in terms of seats allocated to each constituency. It concluded that improvements must continue to ensure a strong and independent NomCom:

<blockquote>A committee that can change its own operating procedures in secret and only announce and

<blockquote>A committee that can change its own operating procedures in secret and only announce and publish the outcome while providing no rational for the changes is very much prone to capture. We respect the independence of the NomCom and it should operate and work for the broader, global public interest. To achieve this, there is a need for more transparency, a more diverse composition of its membership, and better rules to prevent capture. When there is an imbalance of stakeholder group representation on the NomCom (which the first review referred to and which still exists) the independence of the committee cannot be achieved.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180209/44b8a8c1/NomComReview-NCSGcomments.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - NCSG Comments to Assessment Report], February 8, 2018</ref></blockquote>

publish the outcome while providing no rational for the changes is very much prone to capture. We respect the independence of the NomCom and it should operate and work for the broader, global public interest. To achieve this, there is a need for more transparency, a more diverse composition of its membership, and better rules to prevent capture. When there is an imbalance of stakeholder group representation on the NomCom (which the first review referred to and which still exists) the independence of the committee cannot be achieved.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180209/44b8a8c1/NomComReview-NCSGcomments.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - NCSG Comments to Assessment Report], February 8, 2018</ref>

===Draft Final Report===

@@ Line 63: / Line 63: @@
 The [[SSAC]], [[ISPCP]], and [[NCSG]] submitted written comments to the NomCom2 listserv.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/2018-February/date.html NomCom2 Listserv Archive], February 2018</ref> The SSAC echoed the concerns expressed in the consultation call, that the NomCom might not be currently be capable of complying with the new commitments imposed by the IANA transition.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180216/d8d30613/SSAC2018-03-NomcomReviewAssessmentReportFINAL-0001.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - SSAC Comments to Assessment Report] February 15, 2018</ref> The ISPCP took issue with the assessment methodology, and had a variety of objections to the findings in the report.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180202/b7c769ed/ICANNCommentsonNomComReviewAssessmentReport-201802.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - ISPCP Comments to Assessment Report], February 1, 2018</ref> The NCSG, by contrast, agreed with much of the report and emphasized the imbalance of representation both in terms of diversity and in terms of seats allocated to each constituency. It concluded that improvements must continue to ensure a strong and independent NomCom:
-<blockquote>A committee that can change its own operating procedures in secret and only announce and
+<blockquote>A committee that can change its own operating procedures in secret and only announce and publish the outcome while providing no rational for the changes is very much prone to capture. We respect the independence of the NomCom and it should operate and work for the broader, global public interest. To achieve this, there is a need for more transparency, a more diverse composition of its membership, and better rules to prevent capture. When there is an imbalance of stakeholder group representation on the NomCom (which the first review referred to and which still exists) the independence of the committee cannot be achieved.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180209/44b8a8c1/NomComReview-NCSGcomments.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - NCSG Comments to Assessment Report], February 8, 2018</ref></blockquote>
-publish the outcome while providing no rational for the changes is very much prone to capture. We respect the independence of the NomCom and it should operate and work for the broader, global public interest. To achieve this, there is a need for more transparency, a more diverse composition of its membership, and better rules to prevent capture. When there is an imbalance of stakeholder group representation on the NomCom (which the first review referred to and which still exists) the independence of the committee cannot be achieved.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180209/44b8a8c1/NomComReview-NCSGcomments.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - NCSG Comments to Assessment Report], February 8, 2018</ref>
 ===Draft Final Report===