Comment: Proposed Bylaws Changes Regarding Consideration of GAC Advice

[Anthony Niiganii <niiganii@xxxxxxxxx>]

I am speaking with you as:

   - Niiganii , Nahathaway member of Pimicikamak,
   - A Member of a people  gifted by the Creator with the sacred
   stewardship responsibility of Mother Earth
   - Someone who personally experiences, and witnesses, the impacts of a
   government’s historically imposed, and increasing, influence over the
   governing rules that  affects me  as a First Nation and Registered
   Treaty Status Indian,  and also affects my community’s inherent right to
   self-governance, and environmental stewardship, as a Nation;
   - A stakeholder in the multistakeholder mode
   - A Swampy Cree End-user of the internet

I come from a community where the foundation of our traditional government
focuses on ensuring that what we do today is for the benefit of the 7th
generation to come - which is a responsibility shared within each and every
generation.



With regards to the proposed bylaw amendment presented by the GAC, it is my
understanding that Bylaws are the governing rules of any organization; any
changes to those rules must involve all community members of the
organization, particularly when these changes impact all individual members
of the organization, and the community as a whole – and our future!.



The proposed bylaw amendment appears to risk diminishing an already fragile
level of Public Trust, and possibly create an inconsistency within the
governing rules themselves. Therefore, I am unable to find a way to agree
with this questionable proposed amendment, nor have I been equipped with
the wisdom to defend or support such a proposal.



However, I do believe Section 2. Core Values of the bylaws, may provide
valuable insight to achieving consensus that builds public trust. This
section states:

*Any ICANN body making a recommendation or decision shall exercise its
judgment to determine which core values are most relevant and how they
apply to the specific circumstances of the case at hand, and to determine,
if necessary, an appropriate and defensible balance among competing values*



I have been unable to determine if this proposed amendment has any relevant
or beneficial links to any of the core values within the Bylaws.  Nor do I
have a the clear understanding of how this amendment  supports and furthers
the development of ICANN’s mission, or even how it supports the bottom up
multistakeholder model. This advice to amend the bylaws would have dire
consequences on the ability of ICANN’s Board of Directors independent
decision-making abilities. If the amendment is adopted, what happens to the
advice that does not achieve the 2/3, is it automatically adopted? This
lack of clarity is where ICANN may run the risk of stalling a process that
works for the community, as a whole – the uncertainty will exist where one
constituent‘s interest gains more influence over the other constituents.




The motto must never become, “One Government, One Internet”, it must
remain, “One World, One Internet!”



I do strongly agree and support ALAC’s formal statement to the Board,
to “*reconsider
the proposed bylaws changes regarding consideration of GAC advice and
continue to foster equal footing among all participants of the ICANN
community.*”



With that, I share this Cree saying with you:

*Only after the last tree has been cut down*

*Only after the last river has been poisoned *

*Only after the last fish has been caught,*

*Only then will we realize we cannot eat money.*

I offer:

Only after, we have lost our last right to choose, and the ability to
defend that right to choose,

Only then will we realize we have left our children with no choice.
(Niiganii 2014)



One final thought, the “Goose Philosophy” teaches me that together we can
travel further, and that leadership is a shared responsibility of all
community members.  Honk, Honk, Honk!



Ekosani! Kinanaskomitinawa!

Anthony Niiganii

Turtle Island