Comments of CNNIC on "Enhancing ICANN Accountability"
Dear Sir/Madam,
On
behalf of China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC), hereby we would
like to take this opportunity to provide our comments on enhancing ICANN
accountability. Our comments focus mainly on process, concerning the
establishment of ICANN Accountability Working Group and the means by which to
enhance ICANN accountability.
Our specific comments
are as follows:
1.
Overall
Comments
We
welcome all the efforts made by ICANN to enhance its accountability. It plays
an essential role in gaining the consumer trust and smooth transition of IANA
stewardship.
We
have noticed that, ICANN has programmed to address the accountability process
in a separate process, independent from the IANA function transition without
any interaction. ICANN’s commitment to its accountability will directly
influence the reliability of IANA transition. Therefore, we recommend these two
issues shall be discussed and interactively promote within the same framework.
The
core of ICANN’s accountability lies on consumer trust. ICANN shall continue to
maintain remarkable performance of its core function and live up to its
commitment to the ICANN community. From this perspective, ccTLDs and its
affected parties both are major users of IANA function and important
cooperation partners. ICANN needs to pay fully attention to them, meanwhile
ensure the quantity of representatives and their true participation.
2.
Specific
Comments
(1) Comments on
“What additional
comments would you like to share that could be of use to the ICANN
Accountability Working Group?”
ICANN
proposed that ICANN Accountability Working Group is comprised of community
members, namely SO and AC, subject-matter experts and a liaison appointed by
ICANN Board. However, its electing and working mechanism remains obscure to the
public. ICANN shall take equality and representation of all regions into full
account, ensuring the participation of the developing countries, and clarify
the principles of its constitution, personnel assignment and member election.
All the issues above shall be included in the comments to ensure an open and
transparent process.
(2)
Comments on
“What are the means by which the Community is assured that ICANN
is meeting its commitments?”
u
Regarding to Policy
Making
ICANN’s
policy has an essential impact on the global Internet community. The policy
making process is, however, prone to be exclusive by “closed clubs”, which will
cause decision capture. ICANN shall strengthen the transparency of decision
making and implement the bottom-up model.
u
Regarding to Member
Election
Member
election of ICANN shall be pursuant to open and transparent principles with
clear criterion and rules. Further improvement shall be made in terms of the
qualifications and regions of members, and the election process shall be
publicized.
When
electing working group members, ICANN shall give adequate consideration to the
regional balance, ensure the real participation of diverse regions by electing,
especially regarding the developing countries. Asia deserves close attention
from ICANN since it has the world most netizens and registries. Besides, the
ccTLD community, as the major users of ICANN and IANA, shall exert more efforts
and impact on ICANN’s decision making and daily operation.
(3) Comments on
“
Are there other mechanisms that
would better ensure that ICANN lives up to its commitments?”
u
Regarding to External
Supervision
In
the absence of its historical contractual relationship to the U.S., we
recommend that ICANN need to form a more sufficient and effective external
supervision mechanism to develop a credible accountability on policy making and
operation, for purpose of ensuring that ICANN shall pursue its stated
objectives and principles, and fulfill its responsibility to the global Internet
community. With regard to the unpredictable problems in the future, we
recommend the different channels shall be utilized to provide reflections and
supervisions of the global Internet community so as to ensure a timely
adjustment.
u
Regarding to the local
engagement structure
ICANN developed a
branch structure including hub offices and engagements centers like Beijing and
Montevideo in the diverse regions, by which ICANN devotes to expanding the
global influence in all time zones and promote its globalization process. We
consider that this is one of the most significant approaches to promote the
interactions with local participants and establish a presence in all regions of
the globe. We strongly recommend ICANN exert efforts to further substantiate
the full function and working capacity of this architecture, by which ICANN
shall initiate more effective dialogue with the global community.
[About CNNIC]
China Internet Network
Information Center (abbreviated as CNNIC) is an administration and service
organization set up on June 3, 1997 upon the approval of the competent
authority and undertakes the responsibilities as the national Internet network
information center. In light of the policies of "providing efficient and
application oriented services through secure & stable Internet
infrastructure for public interests”, CNNIC, as leading actor in Chinese
information society, is responsible for operation, administration and services
of fundamental Internet resources, undertakes R&D and security work of
fundamental Internet resources, conducts research on Internet development and
internet governance, and promotes the cooperation and technological exchange of
global Internet. A global platform for internet governance research called
internet governance research center (IGR) has also been founded by CNNIC.
Sincerely,
Hongbin Zhu
China Internet Network Information
Center (CNNIC)
Attachment:
Comments of China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC) on Enhancing ICANN Accountability.pdf |