[alac] A request to us from Edward Hasbrouck

[Izumi AIZU <aizu@xxxxxxx>]

It may be too late to include in Annette's presentation,
but I think it is worth to consider.

izumi

request to ALAC for public forum


To: committee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: request to ALAC for public forum
From: "Edward Hasbrouck" <edward@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 13:56:39 -0800

The ICANN "public forum" is scheduled to start in less than 3 hours, and 
the Board of Directors is scheduled to meet on Friday, in less than 2 days.

ICANN's Bylaws require that the agenda for each Board meeting be posted 7 
days in advance. No agenda for the Board meeting Friday has been posted. 
And no reason has been given why it would not have been possible to post at 
least a partial and/or tentative agenda.

For previous face-to-face Board meetings, ICANN has provided an e-mail 
address like "argentina@xxxxxxxxx" or "rio@xxxxxxxxx" for remote 
submissions to the public forum and the Board. No such address, and no 
other means of remote participation, has been provided for the "public 
forum" today and tomorrow. There is a Webcast, but that is a passive, 
one-way means of broadcasting, and does not provide any channel for 
"participation".

The logical point of contact for questions about public participation would 
be ICANN's "Manager of Public Participation", which is required by the 
Bylaws. So far as I can tell from the ICANN Web site, this position is 
vacant. There is no person or e-mail address designated on the ICANN Web 
site for issues related to public participation.

In my capacity as a journalist, I wanted to ask about this at ICANN's press 
conference yesterday, so that I could inform my readers how they could 
participate in the public forum, and what issues would be discussed by the Board.

But despite written promises from both ICANN staff responding to the 
"press@xxxxxxxxx" e-mail address, and ICANN's public relations contractor 
in Wellington, I was not told when the press conference would be held until 
several hours after it had ended, and I was not given the remote 
participation information.

So it is impossible for the public to know what issues the Board is going 
to consider on Friday. And even if we did know, it is impossible for us to 
comment on them unless we are in Wellington.

Even if an agenda were to be posted instantly, and even if cost were no 
object, it would be too late for me to get to Wellington before the end of 
the public forum tomorrow.

This is not a valid "public forum" within the meaning of the Bylaws, and 
any "meeting" of the Board of the Board on Friday -- with neither an agenda 
posted 7 days in advance, nor a public forum on the issues to be discussed 
-- will not be a valid meeting.

Since there is no means for me to participate remotely in the "public 
forum", I request that the ALAC raise this issue with the Board, publicly, 
during the "public forum", so that the Board and other observers in 
Wellington are aware that members of the community who aren't physically 
present in Wellington are being excluded from the "public forum", and have 
questioned the legitimacy of the "public forum" today and tomorrow and the 
scheduled Board meeting on Friday.