Andy, everybody,

On 7 Feb 2021, at 21:53, Andy Davidson wrote:

On 7 Feb 2021, at 13:05, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ripe-list ripe-list@ripe.net wrote:

("Ensure Neutrality of PDP Appeals Procedure”)

Hi, Jordi, all

On your policy proposal: Is this something the Arbiters [0] could do well?

Andy

[0] http://ripe.net/about-us/legal/arbitration/list-of-arbiters

I am certain that the Arbiters could do this well.
Formally there currently seem to be certain obstacles.

1. The Arbiters are appointed by the RIPE NCC Executive Board.

2. The mandate which the current Arbiters have accepted does not include
   a role in the Appeals Procedure of the RIPE PDP.

The RIPE Chair Team considers the first of these a sensitive point,
in view of discussion on the RIPE List last May, which I am sure
that many of you will recall.

Recent advice from the RIPE NCC cites ripe-691:

"The arbitration procedure is available for the settlement of disputes and for the evaluation of requests for Internet number resources by the RIPE NCC."

and more specifically:

"The arbiters are responsible for the settlement of disputes:

Between Members and the RIPE NCC regarding decisions of the Executive Board or the Management Team with respect to the RIPE NCC Standard Service Agreement, including RIPE NCC procedures and implementation of the RIPE Policies"

In preparing a soon-to-appear RIPE document, I have learned that
the idea of enlisting the Arbiters in the PDP Appeals Procedure
was presented at RIPE44, but seems to have been abandoned by the
time of RIPE55, when a full proposal for this procedure was
presented, later to be published in ripe-428.

Best regards,
Niall

—

References:

—