- To: iic-proposed-bylaws@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Accountability
- From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:18:24 -0700 (PDT)
(1) Regarding the proposed new section 5 of Article IV of the ICANN Bylaws:
Requiring a two‐thirds majority vote of the Councils of two‐thirds of ICANN’s
Supporting Organizations (GNSO, ccNSO, or ASO) "and" a two‐thirds majority vote
of the "members" of "each" Advisory Committee (GAC, SSAC, RSSAC and ALAC) is a
grossly excessive requirement to impose upon a community whose sole interest
lies in asking for a reexamination of a Board decision taken by resolution.
One can't help but get the impression that the Board is so very desperate to
remain unaccountable that it has crafted the most unreasonable set of hurdles
to thwart the possibility of any challenge to board-level decision-making.
(2) Regarding the proposed changes that would create the Independent Review
It is shockingly premature to be crafting new bylaws to replace the Independent
Review Process when the very first IRP case to be heard by the International
Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICMregistry-v-ICANN) hasn't been concluded. As
you are aware, IRP hearings in Washington are ongoing with final arguments to
be presented at the end of this week. Likely there will be an additional
period of time involved before the ICDR renders its final conclusions.
Why replace that which hasn't yet even had a chance to be evaluated? It would
clearly be far more logical to defer action on these proposed bylaws changes
until such time as we can take stock regarding the efficaciousness and
desirability of the current Independent Review Process.
(3) Please be aware of the fact that the community has availed itself of
recourse to the U.S. Government so often because it no longer has confidence in
ICANN's decision-making. The massive outpouring of comments in regards to the
proposed new gTLD "open-the-floodgates" approach should be indicative of the
fact that as a Board, you no longer have our trust.
As you reflect upon appropriate accountability measures, ask yourselves as
board members whether your own oversight has been sufficient. From my vantage
point, you have been making far too many bad judgments for far too long and are
now at a point where prompt and efficient external accountability mechanisms
are indeed required.