Dear Daniel,

A couple of points as responded in the Googledoc:
  1. We did not discuss data governance and metrics, only that the requisite data be available to support the next CCT Review. That should suffice, I think.
  2. This goes into too much detail and I prefer to let the ATRT3 recommendation speak for itself.
I have also now added a summary at the end that mentions, "value the impact of Specific Reviews on Internet stability, trust, and accountability from an end-user perspective".

Thanks,
Justine



On Tue, 7 Apr 2026 at 07:53, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Justine and all,

Following the review of the Public Comment proceeding on the Standard Bylaws Amendment – Transition Article on Specific Reviews, I have proposed the text below  for consideration. This input focuses on the timing of the Specific Reviews (particularly the CCT Review) and emphasizes the need for a data governance and metrics framework to enable evidence-based evaluation of the Next Round outcomes.

Proposed Text:

The ALAC and At-Large Community emphasize that the proposed timing for the Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice (CCT) Review under s.27(c)(iv) must be considered in the broader context of Internet stability, trust, and accountability. We recommend that ICANN org explicitly reference the potential implications of review sequencing on end-user interests, particularly regarding the timely identification and mitigation of risks that may arise between review cycles. Furthermore, it is essential that a framework for data governance and metrics be established prior to the Next Round of gTLD delegations. This framework should ensure that all relevant and necessary datasets are available to support evidence-based evaluation of the Next Round outcomes, enabling the next CCT Review to make fully informed, transparent, and actionable recommendations. By adopting this approach, ICANN can strengthen predictability, enhance community confidence, and ensure that review outcomes meaningfully serve the global Internet end-user community.


Thank you

Best regards,
Daniel Nanghaka
Nanghaka Daniel Khauka.
ICT & Digital Transformation Consultant | Knowledge Management & Innovation Specialist | Governance & Development Advisor
Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda)

----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" -----------------------------------------





On Tue, 7 Apr 2026 at 01:44, Judith Hellerstein via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:

Hi All,

I agree with Olivier on this.  I was wondering the same thing after I read the statement.  I will not be on either Wednesday or Thursdays calls because of the Jewish holidays and will be off email Tuesday evening through Thursday evening because of the holiday

Best,

Judith

_________________________________________________________________________
Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
Hellerstein & Associates
3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
Phone: (202) 362-5139  Skype ID: judithhellerstein
Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517
E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com   Website: www.jhellerstein.com
Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/
Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 4/6/26 10:59 AM, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via ALAC wrote:
Dear Justine,

thank you for sharing this draft. 
Do community members in At-Large have the same concern than me when it comes to the very concept of creating a "transition article", which points to the ability for ICANN to re-define the goalposts on the fly? If so, how can this concern be expressed in the Statement? I am not saying it is a red line, but it is a matter of concern in an organisation that is supposed to show good governance.

In relation to the "Proposed s.27(b)(iii) - Extension of the Pause Period by SOAC Majority", what is the rationale for allowing such a process that includes all 7 existing SO/ACs when tasks relating to Bylaw amendments are defined in the Bylaws as requiring action from the Empowered Community whereas according to Annex D, Section 1.4(a) and (b) require in: 

iii) The Approval Action relates to an Articles Amendment and is (A) supported by three or more Decisional Participants (including the Articles Amendment PDP Decisional Participant if the Board Notice included a PDP Articles Statement) and (B) not objected to by more than one Decisional Participant.

This is different to an SO/AC Majority and I do not understand why the Board is not following the Bylaws that relate to such decisions.Perhaps could you please shed the light on this?

Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 06/04/2026 03:34, Justine Chew via OFB-WG wrote:
Dear all, 

The draft ALAC statement on “Standard Bylaws Amendment - Transition Article on Specific Reviews” is available for final community comments until Wednesday, 8 April 2026. The finalized version will be presented a last time at the OFBWG call on Thursday, 9 April 2026. 

Please comment directly in the DRAFT ALAC statement google doc, using the “comment” function.

Our timetable:
  1. Reviewer(s): Initial Bullet Point(s) presentation and rationale for discussion – OFB call of Thursday 26 March DONE
  2. Presentation and discussion of First Draft - OFB call of Thursday 2 April DONE
  3. Community: Comment on Draft Statement - Monday 6 Apr - Wednesday 8 April
  4. Final Draft Presentation - Thursday 9 April
  5. ALAC: Vote on Final Statement – Friday 10 April - Monday 13 April
  6. Staff: Submission of ALAC Statement – Monday 13 April
 
Thank you,
Justine


_______________________________________________
OFB-WG mailing list -- ofb-wg@icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ofb-wg-leave@icann.org

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.



_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.