|
I think that the presently represented groups are necessary but not
sufficient to make of the process and the Nominees/Elected Directors legitimate so
as to stand tests of legitimacy, civil rigths claims, due process, equity, openness,
broad-based consensus requierements, due notice, and rule-making vis-a-vis the limited
knowledge about ICANN (be it by lack of awareness or due to inability to access information
due to cultural/linguistic barriers and the English-only content of these elections,
etc.). Let's face it ICANN is a QUANGOR (i.e., a quasi-non-governmental-agency,
not just your regular 501 c(3) corporation). Even if relegated to the "technical
and coodinating capacity", ICANN nevertheless MAKES policy, not just locally (U.S.
federal/State) but also globally (i.e., affecting nation-states down to the "bone-marrow"
local-of-local levels). Satisfactorily Addressing these by ICANN, prospectively rather
than retrospectively, issues are pruedent, necessary and required if the process
is to be in the spirit of the Memoranda of Understanding between ICANN and the powers
that be, the Constitutionality of the resulting actions and the alingnment of these
with International accords. Sincerely, Nestor Requeno
Los Angeles, California
USA
|
|
|