/
At-Large workspace:Standard Bylaws Amendment – Transition Article on Specific Reviews

At-Large workspace:Standard Bylaws Amendment – Transition Article on Specific Reviews

Public Comment Close

Statement
Name (Please click on hyperlink below for authoritative source)

Status

Assigned Working Group

Assignee(s)

Call for
Comments Open

Call for
Comments
Close 

Vote Open

Vote Close

Date of Submission

Staff Contact and Email

Statement Number

Public Comment Close

Statement
Name (Please click on hyperlink below for authoritative source)

Status

Assigned Working Group

Assignee(s)

Call for
Comments Open

Call for
Comments
Close 

Vote Open

Vote Close

Date of Submission

Staff Contact and Email

Statement Number

Apr 13, 2026

Standard Bylaws Amendment- Transition Article on Specific Reviews

Statement drafting

OFB-WG

Reviewers
Nkoro, N.E.

@bukola.fawole

@Maureen

@claire.craig (editor)

@avri doria

@Justine Chew

Murray McKercher

@Alfredo Calderon

Feb 11, 2026

Apr 13, 2026







Sam Eisner

samantha.eisner@icann.org

AL-ALAC-ST-0426-01-00-EN

Where Community Input is Needed

The following text is from the public comment page and provides context around what is being commented on. 

While the ICANN community has joined together to discuss how ICANN’s reviews can evolve, through the Review of Reviews Cross Community Group, many voices across the ICANN community asked the Board to consider how to update ICANN’s obligations at Article 4, Section 4.6 of the ICANN Bylaws to initiate Specific Reviews until an updated course of reviews is defined. To date, ICANN has addressed the pending obligations to initiate Specific Reviews through Board resolutions deferring their initiation, taken after conversation with the community. ICANN is now seeking community input on a proposal to formalize in the Bylaws the need to pause the Specific Reviews. The ICANN Board initiated a Standard Bylaws Amendment Process to seek formal Public Comment on the proposed path.

The Transition Article presented is drafted to do achieve several goals:

  • It does not alter in any way the current text of Article 4, Section 4.6 of the Bylaws.

  • It allows 12 months of progress on the community dialogue before ICANN’s obligation to conduct Specific Reviews is reinstated.

  • It defines parameters for how ICANN’s obligations can be paused for additional time if the community dialogue is progressing but not yet completed, with a maximum total pause of 24 months.

  • If no updates to the Bylaws result from the current community effort and ICANN’s obligations to conduct Specific Reviews are renewed, it sets a workable schedule for reviews to be restarted in a manner that will not replicate the overlap of reviews that led in part to the issues ICANN currently experiences with reviews.

While commenters might have a range of feedback to provide, some prompting questions include:

  • Do you support the use of the proposed Transition Article as a way to clarify ICANN’s obligations to run Specific Reviews at this time?

  • Are there elements you believe should be addressed differently?

  • Are there other factors that ICANN should consider in the timing of restarting the reviews, if needed in the future?

While the ICANN community has joined together to discuss how ICANN’s reviews can evolve, through the Review of Reviews Cross Community Group, many voices across the ICANN community asked the Board to consider how to update ICANN’s obligations at Article 4, Section 4.6 of the ICANN Bylaws to initiate Specific Reviews until an updated course of reviews is defined. To date, ICANN has addressed the pending obligations to initiate Specific Reviews through Board resolutions deferring their initiation, taken after conversation with the community. ICANN is now seeking community input on a proposal to formalize in the Bylaws the need to pause the Specific Reviews. The ICANN Board initiated a Standard Bylaws Amendment Process to seek formal Public Comment on the proposed path.

The Transition Article presented is drafted to do achieve several goals:

  • It does not alter in any way the current text of Article 4, Section 4.6 of the Bylaws.

  • It allows 12 months of progress on the community dialogue before ICANN’s obligation to conduct Specific Reviews is reinstated.

  • It defines parameters for how ICANN’s obligations can be paused for additional time if the community dialogue is progressing but not yet completed, with a maximum total pause of 24 months.

  • If no updates to the Bylaws result from the current community effort and ICANN’s obligations to conduct Specific Reviews are renewed, it sets a workable schedule for reviews to be restarted in a manner that will not replicate the overlap of reviews that led in part to the issues ICANN currently experiences with reviews.

While commenters might have a range of feedback to provide, some prompting questions include:

  • Do you support the use of the proposed Transition Article as a way to clarify ICANN’s obligations to run Specific Reviews at this time?

  • Are there elements you believe should be addressed differently?

  • Are there other factors that ICANN should consider in the timing of restarting the reviews, if needed in the future?

Executive Summary

A short executive summary, if the draft is ratified, will be placed here after the finalized document has been submitted. 

ALAC is agreeable for the Accountability and Transparency Review to be initiated within 90 days of ICANN’s obligations to conduct Specific Reviews resuming under the proposed s.27(b). While we recognise that the proposed Transition Article is intended as a narrowly scoped and time-bound response to current challenges, we believe this step should remain exceptional and not set a precedent for future processes.

ALAC is agreeable for the Accountability and Transparency Review to be initiated within 90 days of ICANN’s obligations to conduct Specific Reviews resuming under the proposed s.27(b). While we recognise that the proposed Transition Article is intended as a narrowly scoped and time-bound response to current challenges, we believe this step should remain exceptional and not set a precedent for future processes.



FINAL VERSION SUBMITTED (IF RATIFIED)

The final version to be submitted, if the draft is ratified, will be placed here by upon completion of the vote. 









FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC

The final draft version to be voted upon by the ALAC will be placed here before the vote is to begin.









DRAFT SUBMITTED FOR DISCUSSION

The first draft submitted will be placed here before the call for comments begins. 

02 Apr 2026

Google doc on ALAC Draft statement: ALAC Draft statement document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OgDmhy6cTnyyPCVENaNqvTAkDf-28hxce_rLLcCDbKw/edit?tab=t.0

26 Mar 2026
Google doc for bullet points: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19z9RMP-ZzF_92Vxzk-xApR2Ont3gr7W02ekWIEy9q7Y/edit?tab=t.0

Presentation by Justine Chew - Seeking consensus on ICANN's proposal to formally pause Specific Reviews while the Review of Reviews process is ongoing.

02 Apr 2026

Google doc on ALAC Draft statement: ALAC Draft statement document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OgDmhy6cTnyyPCVENaNqvTAkDf-28hxce_rLLcCDbKw/edit?tab=t.0

26 Mar 2026
Google doc for bullet points: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19z9RMP-ZzF_92Vxzk-xApR2Ont3gr7W02ekWIEy9q7Y/edit?tab=t.0

Presentation by Justine Chew - Seeking consensus on ICANN's proposal to formally pause Specific Reviews while the Review of Reviews process is ongoing.