The issue at hand is to do a background check on Stefan Kooman, before he can join the critical systems team, which he has volunteered to do. There is NO WRONG DOING ALLEGED. This is a standard procedure to determine the suitability of a candidate to be given access to critical and sensitive systems.

Before: Arbitrator name : Lambert Hofstra (A). Respondent: Stefan Kooman (R) Claimant: CAcert represented by Alejandro Mery (C) Case: a20090224.1

  1. A: Please assign a Case-Manager from the arbitrators pool
  2. -: Guillaume Romagny has volunteered to be Case Manager
  3. A: Case Manager, since Stefan has not responded yet, can you please attempt to make contact again?

Arbitrator "Ruling: I accept the nomination"

Proposed process for background check (addition to the security manual):

- The Arbitrator must appoints 1 or more people to procede to the background check. The number is depending on the criticity of CAcert position opened. The Arbitrator should appoint CAcert association members, CAcert officers or CAcert critical system members to conduct the interviews and collect the pieces of informations about the person checked. If really needed, the arbitrator can be one of the interviewers.

- The interviewers should agree on a method to process the checking.

- The appointed interviewers do the background check and keep private the collected pieces of information 

- The interviewers must report to the Arbitrator & Case manager 

- The Arbitrator rules on the reports provided (Accept, Refuse or Defer the nomination) and ack the CAcert Board about the decision. In case of split, the Arbitrator may need to appoint another interviewer to improve the checking

- The case manager is independant from interviewers and report the CAcert board about the fairness of the arbitration / interviews

- The CAcert Board can veto the Arbitrator ruling as a last resort

TODO : update and / or

Arbitrations/a20090224.1 (last edited 2009-12-25 22:28:37 by UlrichSchroeter)