Re: [council] Re:

[Amadeu Abril i Abril <Amadeu@nominalia.com>]

Joe Sims wrote:
> 
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> ____
> 
>  This message is intended for the individual or entity named above.  If you
> are not the intended
>  recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to
> others; also please
>  notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from
> your system.  Thank you.
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> ____
> 
> Dennis:
> 
> The relevant language from the bylaws is as follows:
> 
> "Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, no official of a national
> government or a multinational entity established by treaty or other
> agreement between national governments may serve as a Director. As used
> herein, the term "official" means a person (a) who holds an elective
> governmental office or (b) who is employed by such government or
> multinational entity and whose primary function with such government or
> entity is to develop or influence governmental or public policies."
> [Article V, Sec. 5]
> 
> Thus, there are two questions:  is a paid UN Special Envoy "employed by"
> the UN; and is Mr. Bildt's position one whose "primary function is to
> develop or influence governmental or public policies?"
> 
> After consulting internally, and thinking this through, I think the answer
> to both is yes.  A consultant is a temporary employee, hired to do a

Joe,

I have asked Eva Grêlich to consult that with you form the first
second I lerned Carl's nomination. I remembr only too well the
discussion about the prvision you cpoide above.

As many of you will remembr this is popularly known as the
"anti-Wilkinson provision", named after Chritopher, our beloved EC
offical  ;-))

We all got the sense of that clause: prevent the GAC to also become
the Board (sorry about the exageration: you all know by now my
fhetoric...). And we all agreed on that, while asking a clearer
definiton that would not prevent a University professor, or a netwoks
system administrator, to be ocaught by it, as they could be "civil
servants" or public employees in many cases and jurisdictions.
Policymaking was the final deviding line.

Perhaps now, when waters are calmer than one year ago, it is time to
re-design the anti-Wilkinson clause. No, Becky Burr should not sit in
the Board. But we should think twice whether Carl Bildt, or somene in
his position, should be barred from doing so.

Indeed his job puts him in a "dangereous close contact " (so to
speak...) with policymakers in foregin policy...which might have close
links with ICANN decisionmaking. IMHO, this is overkill.

I would therfore encourage the NC to submit to the Board a possible
amendment in order to more clearly define the scope of the
"anti-Wilkinson clause" in order to specify that policy measn
Internet-related policy, evn in a mediate sense.

But, as I have pointed out to many fellow NC members, I am afraid that
your reading is perfecly correct right now.

Amadeu

^S: To make things clearer: I think that Carl Mildt is an excellent
candidate for the ICANN Board, but not for the DNSO. I feel that his
place would be prefarbly being elected by the at large membership
mechansims. And I was really reluctnat to vote for him right now. I
was trying, through Eva, to better understand his positons and
commitments, and also trying to contact him directly, in order to
axcertain whether I should reverse my inital position.