[council] Procedural concerns

["babybows.com" <webmaster@babybows.com>]

Dear Names Council members,

The participants in the Review Working Group have been advised by the Chair
of the Names Council, that:

"The work of the existing WG Review (whose terms of reference were to
contribute to the consulting phase of the review process) will come to a
close 16 April. At this date the list will close and subscribers will be
transferred to the GA Announce list as is usual practice. General discussion
will continue on the main GA list."

I bring this pronouncement to your attention because:

1. it has been issued without the benefit of a Names Council resolution on
the closure of this mailing list
2. it is improper to issue an edict that the work of the Review Working
Group will come to a close on a specified date if this subject matter is
still on the proposed NC Meeting Agenda as a matter of discussion (note
point #8 on the NC Chair's recent memo to the Intake Committee) - this is a
clear abuse of the power delegated to your Chair who should be no more than
the First among Equals.
3. the terms of reference are still clearly a matter subject to dispute.
The members of the Review Working Group were provided with their terms of
reference (which specified a lifetime until the Stockholm meeting) by Ms.
Y.J.Park, the Names Council designated Chair, in her introductory message to
the Review WG list - this is a matter of public record
4. a formal appeal (supported by twenty members of the Review WG) was lodged
with the Intake Committee regarding the terms of reference dispute on 27
February 2001 which has still not been formally discussed publicly by the
Intake Committee
5. such a violation of the principles of due process, fairness, and the
principle of allowing for a reconsideration request, is not in keeping with
the Council's obligation under ICANN Bylaws:  " The NC is responsible for
ensuring that all responsible views have been heard and considered prior to
a decision by the NC."
6. as no representative of the Review Working Group has been invited to
present the viewpoint of the Review Working Group on these issues, the Names
Council cannot contend that all responsible views have been heard.

Respectfully,
Danny Younger
Member, Review Working Group