Re: [bc-gnso] ICANN Board - GAC Meeting

["Greg Ogorek" <gogorek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Cyveillance will support this.

Great job Michael!

Greg Ogorek
Cyveillance, Inc.


On 1/5/11 6:20 PM, "Michael D. Palage" <michael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hello All,
> As many of you may know the ICANN Board and GAC have scheduled an
> intercessional meeting in Geneva next month to resolve outstanding issues in
> connection with the new gTLD implementation process. Unfortunately to date
> details of whether this meeting will be open/closed to observers has not yet
> been publicly addressed.  As a strong advocate toward openness and
> transparency I have drafted the following text which calls for the meeting to
> be open to observers, I did so after talking with several ICANN stakeholders
> that shared these same concerns.   It would be my hope that SOs/ACs/SGs and
> individuals could make their voice heard on this important issue. I welcome
> any questions/comments.
> Best regards,
> Michael
>  
> DRAFT TEXT
> Over the past eighteen months ICANN has had the opportunity to navigate
> through a number of challenges and achievements:  expiration of the Joint
> Project Agreement and the negotiation and signing of the Affirmation of
> Commitments; introduction of new internationalized top-level domains in the
> ccTLD fast track process; preparing for the pending exhaustion of IPv4 address
> space while advancing the visibility of IPv6; and progress on addressing
> remaining work on the proposed Applicant Guidebook/process to introduce new
> gTLDs, including IDNs.
>  
> As important as these initiatives have been, ICANN is now experiencing a new
> challenge, an upcoming consultation between the ICANN Board and Government
> Advisory Committee (GAC). This consultation appears to be the first time that
> ICANN¹s Board and the GAC will use provisions set forth in Article XI Section
> 2 to resolve situations where the Board has decided to reject GAC advice.
>  
> In many ways, the legacy of ICANN¹s leadership will be significantly impacted
> by how the parameters are established for this upcoming consultation between
> the ICANN Board and the GAC, which appears to have been scheduled for the end
> of February in Geneva. Switzerland.
>  
> While the undersigned support this meeting as an important step in bringing
> about the responsible conclusion of the new gTLD implementation process, and
> other issues as defined in the GAC Communiqué, we call on the Board to provide
> certain safeguards to protect ICANN¹s legitimacy as a bottom up, private
> sector led consensus driven global organization.
>  
> We respectfully request that this consultation between the Board and GAC be
> open to observers, consistent with the practices of GAC ­ Board interactions
> at the public meetings which ICANN holds three times a year. Since this is the
> first meeting of this nature in ICANN¹s eleven year history, the precedent for
> all future such meetings will be established by this meeting.
>  
> We note that no clear communication on this aspect of the meeting has yet been
> provided. Therefore, we believe it is timely to express the views of the ICANN
> community on this topic. Specifically, that ICANN should provide for both
> onsite and remote observers to this interaction. An examination of the
> relevant ICANN bylaws, commitments and best practices are provided below:
>  
>  
> Article I, Section 3 of the ICANN Bylaws states that ³ICANN and its
> constituent bodies shall operate to the maximum extent feasible in an open and
> transparent manner and consistent with procedures designed to ensure
> fairness.²  
>  
> Article 3 of the Affirmation of Commitment (AoC) states that ICANN commits to
> ³ensur[ing] that decisions made related to the global technical coordination
> of the DNS are made in the public interest and are accountable and
> transparent.² While the GAC is clearly suited to provide advice to ICANN
> regarding ³public interest², this advice should be provided in an open meeting
> accommodating observers.
>  
> The new gTLD policy development and implementation process has been a
> multi-year process that has taken place through a series of public
> consultations, and since the majority of the items that will be discussed in
> this intercessional meeting are about concerns of the GAC regarding aspects of
> the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook, we ask that this meeting provide for both
> onsite and remote observers.
>  
> Holding the intercessional meeting in a closed manner will raise questions of
> legitimacy, and could have a chilling effect on future ICANN policy
> development processes. We believe it is also not consistent with the form of
> multi stakeholder model that ICANN embodies. It may even have a negative
> impact on ICANN¹s legitimacy within the broader stakeholder community, which
> has supported it over the last twelve years.
>  
> Recently, ICANN was a recent signatory to a collaborative letter raising
> concerns about the actions taken by the Commission on Science and Technology
> for Development (CSTD) Bureau to exclude non-government actors from full
> participation in the Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance
> Forum.  ICANN participated in both the UN Consultation on Enhanced
> Cooperation, and in the CSTD Panel held on December 17, and actively supported
> the importance of allowing private sector stakeholders in these meetings.  It
> is hard to reconcile ICANN¹s position in this letter if it organizes a closed
> intercessional meeting with the GAC to resolve outstanding issues in the new
> gTLD Applicant Guidebook/process.
>  
> We accept that there may be space limitations for observers, as there often
> are in the face to face ICANN meetings. Given logistics and budgetary
> restraints, it is unlikely that large numbers of in-person attendees would
> travel to Geneva. Therefore, ICANN should also provide real time transcription
> and audio streaming of the proceedings, with an MP3 recording in a timely
> manner. 
>  
>  
>  
>