ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[bc-gnso] FW: Status / statement from the CCWG-Accountability after Face-to-Face Meeting in Buenos Aires

  • To: BC List <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [bc-gnso] FW: Status / statement from the CCWG-Accountability after Face-to-Face Meeting in Buenos Aires
  • From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 11:29:15 +0000

Attached are the Board questions we’re discussing here today.

From: Steve DelBianco
Date: Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 8:19 PM
To: BC List
Subject: Status / statement from the CCWG-Accountability after Face-to-Face 
Meeting in Buenos Aires

An update from your CSG rep on the WG for ICANN Accountability: We met all day 
Friday here in Buenos Aires and had a roller-coaster ride of a meeting.

We started at a low point ( confrontation with ICANN Board and legal team, and 
the prospect of losing consensus around enforceable community powers).

But we ended on a high, after some innovations that can be enforceable while 
still preserving the current AC/SO structure and avoiding the need to create 
any new entities or structures.

Below is our official communique, and I’ll be glad to provide details when we 
meet this week.

Statement from the CCWG-Accountability after Face-to-Face Meeting in Buenos 
Aires,  20 June 2015

Members and participants of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing 
ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) Meet in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 19 
June 2015.

The CCWG-Accountability face-to-face in Buenos Aires was attended in-person by 
49 members and participants, as well as by a number of participants and 
observers that joined the meeting remotely using the virtual meeting room. 1 
Advisors also participated.

The group discussed the summaries it had earlier prepared of the comments 
received from the community during the first public comment period on its 
initial draft 
 and can report the following:

Broad support was received for the overall accountability architecture 
proposed, based on on 4 building blocks, i.e. an empowered community, the 
Board, the Bylaws and the Independent Review Process.

Most comments considered the proposals would be improvements to ICANN's current 
accountability mechanisms.

Several commenters recommended the CCWG-Accountability take a more detailed 
look at the accountability of the community itself (the SOs and ACs) and also 
to ensure that ICANN is accountable to all stakeholders, including those 
outside ICANN.

While most commenters expressed support for the recommendations, some expressed 
concerns primarily regarding implementation details, legal implications, 
complexity, and underlying costs and risks associated with the proposals.

While encouraged by the support received on the overall approach, the group 
acknowledges the concerns expressed and will give due consideration to 
suggestions and concerns as it develops a revised proposal in preparation for 
the upcoming second public comment period.

With regards to the community empowerment mechanism, the CCWG-Accountability 
has considered various models, and has acknowledged the commonality of views 
with regards to expectations of such models, including the need to set up 
mutual accountability, and enhancements to openness and diversity.

In particular, a number of commenters have raised concerns with the reference 
model. In that model, SOs and ACs would be required to set up separate legal 
entities, such as formally registering unincorporated associations, as their 
legal vehicle to exercise community powers. Feedback suggested that the 
community sees this model as too complex. The CCWG-Accountability has analyzed 
these comments carefully and will now focus its work on a refined model. This 
fresh approach, provisionally called the Empowered SO/AC model, gives the 
community comparable authority while not adding legal entities separate from 
the SOs and Acs.

The CCWG-Accountability also considered public comments related to the 
dependencies with the CWG-Stewardship's final proposal. As the 
CWG-Stewardship's proposal is under consideration by Chartering Organizations, 
the CCWG-Accountability notes that each of the items that the CWG-Stewardship 
has identified as critical to its proposal received overall support from the 
community. None of the comments suggested that CWG-Stewardship requirements 
could or should not be met.

The CCWG-Accountability will share these outcomes and considerations with the 
various groups and communities during ICANN53. The group looks forward to 
continuing the fruitful exchanges that inform further deliberations towards a 
second round of public comment, which is expected to be published by the end of 

Attachment: Implementation and Impact Testing Questions for CCWG[1].pdf
Description: Implementation and Impact Testing Questions for CCWG[1].pdf

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy