Comment on Stakeholder Charters by Cheryl Langdon-Orr ALAC Chair 2007-2009

[Cheryl Langdon-Orr <cheryl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Comment on Stakeholder Charters by Cheryl Langdon-Orr ALAC Chair 2007-2009

Disclaimer: This comment is intended to ensure that the Board Structural 
Improvements Committee (SIC) is aware of and takes into account in this 
current public comment period the previous activities, views and 
opinions, including Advice to the Board, and ratified Statements of the 
At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and the At-Large Community with 
specific reference to the development of the new structure of the GNSO, 
its Council and the Stakeholder Group model. This is not a formal or 
ratified statement or comment per se but rather a synopsis of those 
previously provided in various fora to date.
As Chairman of the ALAC, I would like to thank the Structural 
Improvements Committee (SIC) for this additional opportunity for our 
community to continue to be involved in the GNSO Improvements processes, 
and specifically the SG model as it applies to the User House and to 
comment on the most recently revised version of the Stakeholder Group 
(SG) Charters. The outline provided here is limited to matters of the 
User House in general and the Non Commercial Stakeholders Group in 
particular.
We see this as a clear indication of the continued intention of the 
ICANN Board to better engage with the user community, inclusive of civil 
society elements both already engaged in, and yet to be welcomed to the 
ICANN community and specifically the work of the GNSO, as effectively as 
possible. We recognise this is a ‘work in progress’ of course, and one 
made more difficult because of the apparent lack of nexus with the wider 
community of Internet Users, Civil Society and Public Interest groups 
and advocates that have an interest in Internet and Communication 
matters and the specific mandate and mission of ICANN, and as such wish 
to assure the SIC, Board and ICANN Community that as a primary ‘home’ 
for the voice of the Internet User in ICANN we will continue to do our 
best to facilitate greater involvement and activity from this sector 
into the GNSO and its future Working Groups as well as encourage direct 
involvement in the Non Commercial Stakeholder Group when the Charter is 
approved.
Specifically we maintain that only with a best possible new model of 
caucus and integration of consensus built, opinion and view, from the 
widest possible (and perhaps quite dynamic) variety of interest groups 
representing and including Individual Internet Users and future users 
and Domain Name Registrants, (not merely current Registrant communities 
of interest), that is truly international and global (in terms of 
regional diversity) will there be any assurance of open, transparent and 
accountable Policy Development Processes (PDP) and greater good outcomes 
from the radically designed model for the GNSO where the User voice is 
being effectively heard and integrated to the future of the Policy 
Development and Processes of the GNSO.
ALAC was directly involved in the development of this model since the 
close of the Paris Meeting in 2008 and we understand the importance of 
the parity, trust and goodwill that must be developed and ensured 
between the Commercial and Non-Commercial Stakeholder Groups for the 
User House to function fairly and effectively, and of the importance of 
Council structure. An essential part of this (as with any successful 
change management process) will be to ensure that the Charters for all 
the SG’s not only meet simple design requirements, and of course to be 
consistence with the Board’s GNSO Improvements Report, but to also 
maximise ‘buy in and/or ownership’ from the existing players under the 
current model *and* ensure that opportunity and maximised likelihood 
exists for new, additional or restructured players (interest groups and 
sub-groups) to be attracted to engage with and take an equitable role in 
the SG’s not only now but in the future.
At each of the User House Meetings since Cairo the ALAC has advised a 
lack of support and various concerns about the NCUC developed NCSG 
Charter version(s) and also felt unable to support the alternate Port 80 
Charter; whilst various efforts and considerable headway was made 
(At-Large and Policy Staff have been involved with these and can provide 
detailed activity reports if desired and various materials and reports 
are available in the NCSG Commons set up by the ALAC for this purpose 
https://st.icann.org/ncsg-commons/index.cgi?non_commercial_stakeholder_group_commons 
) to find satisfactory modifications to the proposed Charters, or third 
option alternatives that would meet our joint objectives and address all 
our existing concerns (including a proposed round table face to face 
meeting/ facilitated workshop) between the Mexico Meeting and the May 
Resolution of the Board that resulted in these SG Charters.
As the ALAC has maintained throughout this process as an Advisory 
Committee with our broader than GNSO interests mandate, we do not wish 
to be per se directly involved as part of the NCSG we have however 
continued to offer what facilitation and support we can to an outcome 
where the NCSG Charter best meets the aims of the new GNSO Model and the 
Boards criteria, which we support, and believe is (with the additional 
version changes as at July 19^th ) being essentially met.
Maturity and development of the new design GNSO and specifically the 
parity and viability of the User House will benefit greatly with the 
“fresh start” this Charter in our opinion provides and it should be 
noted that in it we can see that the opinions and views brought forward 
in our processes, activities and meetings on the matter have been 
recognised, heard and considered.
On a final and purely personal note, in my opinion the work of the SIC 
and staff to date on this as well as the future modifications and 
ratifications that may occur as a result of this public comment process, 
combined with the transition planning options discussed in Sydney will 
enhance the future of a broad and representatively viable NCSG within 
the User House of the GNSO, but will not be without either significant 
challenges. Further to ensure best possible outcomes there will be a 
need for ICANN to continue its support in specific matters such as 
outreach to and some staff support of the new constituencies within it 
until both a critical mass and dynamic has been developed, and the 
general success of the new GNSO model is ‘proved’.
Kindest regards,
Cheryl Langdon-Orr

ALAC Chair 2007-2009.