Summary

  • The ICANN Board approved a Standard Bylaws Amendment to Article 27 on 3 May 2026, adding a temporary pause-and-reset mechanism for Specific Reviews (new Section 27.6, Timing for Specific Reviews).
  • The ALAC, acting as an Empowered Community Decisional Participant, filed the cycle's only Rejection Action Petition Notice on 1 June 2026, citing further delay to reviews, formalised delay, excessive gaps between review cycles and insufficient handling of public-comment input.
  • The ASO consulted the AFRINIC, APNIC, ARIN, LACNIC and RIPE NCC communities via their CCG mailing lists, received no input supporting the petition, and declined support on 9 June 2026.
  • The Empowered Community Administration certified termination under Annex D Section 2.2(d)(ii) of the ICANN Bylaws, signed by its five representatives: Germán Valdez (ASO), Jonathan Zuck (ALAC), Alejandra Reynoso (ccNSO), Jennifer Chung (GNSO) and Nicolas Caballero (GAC).

The instrument and the clock

The power at stake comes from the ICANN Bylaws' Empowered Community architecture. When the Board approves certain bylaws amendments, Decisional Participants may initiate a Rejection Action within a defined window. Staff treated 11 May 2026 as the Rejection Action Board Notification Date, which set a 21-day petition period, extended to 1 June 2026 at 23:59 PDT (06:59 UTC on 2 June 2026). The Support Period then ran seven days, expiring at 23:59 PDT on 8 June 2026 (06:59 UTC on 9 June 2026). The procedural record is documented in the ECAdmin mailing-list notices ([ECAdmin mailing-list notice], [ECA termination notice (PDF)]) and in the ICANN EC Rejection Actions Procedure Handbook ([https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ec-rejection-actions-procedure-handbook-06mar18-en.pdf]).

The petition, and the only one

The ALAC filed the sole Rejection Action Petition Notice in this cycle, directed at the amendment creating new Section 27.6. Rejection Processes for the three FY27 plans and budgets were automatically terminated under Annex D Section 2.2(c)(ii) because no petitions were filed against them ([ECAdmin mailing-list notice]). In other words, the community's entire rejection machinery for the cycle was exercised once, and only once. The petition notice and the termination certificate are preserved in the ECAdmin list archives (ECA rejection-process termination notice (PDF), ECAdmin notice).

The ASO's canvass and decline

The ASO received the request to consider supporting the petition and referred it to the RIR communities — AFRINIC, APNIC, ARIN, LACNIC and RIPE NCC — through the respective CCG mailing lists ([https://aso.icann.org/follow-up-notice-to-the-rir-community-icann-empowered-community-rejection-action-petition/], [https://www.nro.net/notice-to-the-rir-community-request-for-aso-consideration-of-icann-empowered-community-rejection-action/]). No input in support was received. On that basis the ASO decided not to support the Community Rejection Petition and communicated this to the ECA and ALAC on 9 June 2026, in a letter preserved in ICANN's correspondence repository ([https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/correspondence/aso-to-alac-09-06-2026-en.pdf]). The ASO's follow-up notice to the RIR community records the outcome ([https://aso.icann.org/follow-up-notice-to-the-rir-community-icann-empowered-community-rejection-action-petition/]).

Certification of termination

With no supporting Decisional Participant within the Support Period, Annex D Section 2.2(d)(ii) required termination. The ECA's termination notice for the Standard Bylaws Amendment to Article 27 ([ECA termination notice (PDF)]) certifies precisely that, signed by the five representatives named above. The ECA's correspondence repository also records a subsequent ECA-to-Jeffrey letter dated 3 July 2026 in the aftermath of the rejection cycle ([https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/correspondence/eca-to-jeffrey-03-07-2026-en.pdf]).

The parallel approval-action track

This rejection-action sequence ran alongside, and distinct from, the Articles 17 and 18 Fundamental Bylaws Amendments, which followed an approval-action path: an ASO community forum notice on 11 May 2026 ([https://www.nro.net/notice-to-the-aso-community-on-approval-action-community-forum-on-board-approval-of-fundamental-bylaws-amendments-to-articles-17-and-18-of-the-icann-bylaws/]) and a follow-up notice on the approval-action decision period dated 12 June 2026 ([https://aso.icann.org/follow-up-notice-to-the-aso-community-on-the-approval-action-decision-period-for-fundamental-bylaws-amendments-to-articles-17-and-18-of-the-icann-bylaws/]). The two tracks illustrate that the Empowered Community's power instruments operate on separate clocks and thresholds depending on whether an amendment is fundamental or standard.

What the record supports — and what it does not

The documents establish the dates, the sole-petitioner status, the ASO canvass and decline, and the certified termination. They do not record why no other Decisional Participant came forward, nor the internal deliberations of the ccNSO, GNSO or GAC. Excerpt-level retrieval applies to several ASO and NRO notices, and the full text of the 3 July 2026 ECA letter was not inspected for this article. Readers should treat the failure as a documented procedural outcome, not an adjudication of the amendment's substance.