<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[bc-gnso] CCWG on ICANN Accountability: Work Stream 1 and the concept of Leverage
- To: BC List <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [bc-gnso] CCWG on ICANN Accountability: Work Stream 1 and the concept of Leverage
- From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2015 23:05:18 +0000
First, Happy New Year! And second, here’s an update from the Accountability
CCWG<https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/CCWG+on+Enhancing+ICANN+Accountability>.
We had our 4th call on Tuesday (call
notes<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51414982>). The
work team I am leading has
documented<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51414327/WorkArea2%20Accountability%20suggestions%20%5Bdraft%205.1%5D.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1419814534000&api=v2>
many accountability mechanisms, placing them into one of 2 ‘work streams’
according to this rationale:
Work Stream 1 is designated for accountability enhancement mechanisms that must
be in place [or firmly committed]
before IANA transition occurs. All other consensus items could be in Work
Stream 2, provided there are mechanisms in WS1 adequate to force implementation
of WS2 items despite resistance from ICANN management and board.

At this point the CCWG is debating that rationale, with some members fearing
that ICANN's board might reject significant new accountability measures. Below
is the response I gave to Alan Greenberg when he expressed that concern:
On 1/2/15, 5:12 PM, "Steve DelBianco"
<sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Alan Greenberg has questioned the accountability measures we were placing into
Work Stream 1, saying,
"I am somewhat troubled by all of the items in WS1 where I do not see the
direct link to the IANA transition. Note I am not saying that they might not be
perfectly valid and desirable accountability mechanism, just that I do not see
the direct link, and thus perhaps greatly increasing our work to be done to
allow transition.”
In responding to Alan, several of us said that a direct link to IANA transition
is neither required nor desirable. Instead, the IANA transition is the
community’s last bit of leverage to force accountability measures on ICANN’s
board. The leverage is directly held by NTIA, who has said they would not
transition IANA unless there was consensus about holding ICANN accountable to
the community once the IANA contract is gone. And the internet community has
indirect leverage, though pressure being brought on the US Administration and
on Congress.
So I would hope that Alan and others can gain confidence and comfort with the
leverage our CCWG holds in this process. With that leverage comes the
responsibility to create accountability mechanisms that will guide DNS policy
making for decades to come. And we must also get our work done without causing
undue delay to the IANA transition process.
Alan’s group is the ALAC, which has often felt the lack of leverage over
ICANN’s board and and management. As a recent example, ALAC called on ICANN to
stop delegating new gTLDs serving highly regulated sectors but lacking
enforceable public interest commitments
(link<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/alac-to-icann-board-16oct14-en.pdf>).
ICANN’s board and management might continue signing contracts despite concerns
of the ALAC and others, perhaps fearing lawsuits by gTLD applicants. The fear
of lawsuits may also have led the board to ignore community concerns over
delegating both singular and plural forms of the same gTLDs. After all, the
ICANN board’s duty is to the interests of the ICANN corporation — not to the
community. (see Bylaws
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/bylaws-2012-02-25-en#VI> Article 6,
Section 7).
What would be the source of leverage to hold the board accountable to the
community for this decision? We have seen the futility of Reconsideration
requests and Independent Reviews that lack leverage to reverse a board decision.
This IANA transition is our last chance to create mechanisms that could hold
ICANN’s board accountable to the community it was designed to serve. Let's
embrace that challenge and use all the leverage we have.
—
Steve DelBianco
Executive Director
NetChoice
http://www.NetChoice.org<http://www.netchoice.org/> and
http://blog.netchoice.org<http://blog.netchoice.org/>
+1.202.420.7482
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|