3,197
edits
Changes
no edit summary
(iii) One or more actions or inactions of the Board or Staff that are taken as a result of the Board's or staff's reliance on false or inaccurate relevant information.<ref>Section 4.2(c), [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article4 Article 4, ICANN Bylaws], as amended November 28, 2019</ref></blockquote>
(iii) One or more actions or inactions of the Board or Staff that are taken as a result of the Board's or staff's reliance on false or inaccurate relevant information.<ref>Section 4.2(c), [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article4 Article 4, ICANN Bylaws], as amended November 28, 2019</ref></blockquote>
===Applicability to String Delegations, New gTLD Program===
The reconsideration process was available for challenges to expert determinations rendered by third party dispute resolution service provider (DRSP) panels in the [[New gTLD Program]], if the panels or staff failed to follow established policies or processes in reaching the expert determination.<ref>[https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb New gTLD Program - Applicant Guidebook]</ref> In other words, the substance of an expert determination could not be challenged, but a failure in procedural requirements could be.
===Excluded from Reconsideration===
The Bylaws expressly exclude the following subjects from the reconsideration mechanism:
The Bylaws expressly exclude the following subjects from the reconsideration mechanism:
* Disputes relating to country code top-level domain ("ccTLD") delegations and re-delegations;
* Disputes relating to country code top-level domain ("ccTLD") delegations and re-delegations;
==Process==
==Process==
Under the current Bylaws, the [[ICANN Board|Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee]] (BAMC) reviews and considers the requests.<ref>Section 4.2(e) and (k), [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article4 Article 4, ICANN Bylaws], as amended November 28, 2019</ref> In previous versions of the reconsideration process, the Board Governance Committee was responsible for the full review process (with no referral to the ICANN Ombudsman as described below).<ref>see, e.g., the [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/bylaws-2012-02-25-en#IV Accountability Mechanisms] of the Bylaws in effect as amended in July 2014</ref> If the committee determines that the reconsideration request fails to meet the requirements specified in Article 4.2 of the Bylaws, or is "frivolous," it can summarily dismiss the request on that basis.<ref>Section 4.2(k), [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article4 Article 4, ICANN Bylaws], as amended November 28, 2019</ref> Dismissal on the sole basis that the request is frivolous is rare.<ref>See, e.g., [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/reconsideration-16-2-commercial-connect-request-2016-02-10-en Request 16.2 - Commercial Connect LLC], February 25, 2016, where despite identifying Commercial Connect's abuse of "all of ICANN's Accountability Mechanisms," the BAMC nonetheless provides an analysis on the sufficiency of the request.</ref>
If the reconsideration requests passes through the initial review, the BAMC refers the matter to the [[ICANN Ombudsman]] for investigation in coordination with the BAMC.<ref>Section 4.2(l), [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article4 Article 4, ICANN Bylaws], as amended November 28, 2019</ref>
If the reconsideration request passes through the initial review, the BAMC refers the matter to the [[ICANN Ombudsman]] for investigation in coordination with the BAMC.<ref>Section 4.2(l), [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article4 Article 4, ICANN Bylaws], as amended November 28, 2019</ref>
==References==
==References==