RE: [council] Some Thoughts on the Elections Process

["Chicoine, Caroline" <chicoinc@PeperMartin.com>]

If we want to get nominations moving and posted by Elisabeth, I think we
should have a link to the ICANN bylaws so that nominees are informed as
to their obligations as an ICANN Board member.  

In the "applicaiton", they should:
(1) provide full name and email address
(2)  indicate the individuals and organizations (along with the
organization's geographic region, if applicable) supporting the
nomination  (while we will be establishing a minimum as to the number of
supporters, I think all supporters should be listed so we can see how
broad of support each nominee has)
(3) to the extent that a nominee is a member of any Constituency, at
least one of the supporters of their nomination must come from outside
such Constituency (????  I do not want to create any barriers but I
think we should have some low threshold)
(4) indicate citizenship and residency (in case the rules change)
(5) indicate your acceptance of the nomination
(6) provide a concise summary no more than two pages (???) indicating
your qualifications.

Just some ideas that were discussed with respect to getting our
elections going in the IPC.



-----Original Message-----
From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@nic.gg]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 1999 7:02 AM
To: Amadeu Abril i Abril
Cc: Dennis.Jennings@ucd.ie; council@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [council] Some Thoughts on the Elections Process



> > This is the simplest Condition.  Some simple mechanism needs to be
> > found to allow people to nominate.  Probably we need a seconding and
> > support statement mechanism.  The suggestion that the person needs
> > the formal support of 10 other people is fine (but does not really
add very

10 members of the GA OR a constiuency would be my recommendation. 
The names of the nominators to appear on the ballot.

Constiuencies ought also formally to be able to issue statements of
support to one or more candidates. Such 'supported by' statements
to appear on the ballot.

---------------------
> We should establish perhaps an electoral committee, but in the
> meanwhile nominations can be snet to the Secretariat, who could set up
> a special page with the status of the process.

As I have already declared that I have no intention of being a candidate

for the ICANN Board and as I do have some small experience of public
elections 
(for those of you who don't know, I was a candidate for the United
Kingdom's
House of Commons in the 1997 UK General Election), I will volunteer to
organise such an electoral committee.

------------------------

> 
> As for the four weeks period. Well, you know the anser: it is not
> possible, as we must elect the directors by October 15 (thdone by the
> permanent NC). 

Alithough I note Joe's comments I have still to see a formal memo
instructing us to do this by the Board. 

I would like to see this, since I do not like the idea of us doing 
business simply as the result of "what someone said to someone else in
Santiago".

I do agree with Joe about the desirability of early elections, and I
will work hard to help the NC meet this deadline.


> I would prefer open balots voer secret ones. Transparency, Ithink they
> call it ;-))

Actually, not in the case of elections. 

The secret ballot in carrying out elections is something which is
enshrined 
in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

Open ballots do not promote transparency, in fact the reverse. 
(Open balloting was the norm in UK public elections prior to the Reform
Act
of 1832, before which, parliamentary election results were, shall we
say, 
less a matter of democracy, than of undue influnce.)

The elections /must/ be by secret ballot of the NC members, though of
course 
in the normal course of campaigning, they may wish to make their views 
public and are entirely free to do so.



Nigel

 
> Best regards,
> 
> Amadeu, nearlky completing this round of backlogged em-mails....