[soac-mapo] Further considerations on need for an independent resource to advise on Strings raising Cultural, Linguistic, and other sensitivities

[Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear colleagues
I have been following our discussions with great interest. I am also reminded 
of  relevant work done by the President's Strategy Committee that has some 
relevance. 
In the work of the PSC, we gathered extensive public comment about the 
importance of independent input and advice to the Board, and external appeal.  
The PSC took extensivepublic review and comment on its work. I don't want to 
distract us with a review of that work, but I do want to note it due to its 
relevance to our work on a process that can advise the Board on strings that 
encounter objections.  To put it simply, while the Board will make the final 
decisions, they must have advice, and guidance from experts, relevant to the 
decisions.  I don't consider it practicalor useful to expect ICANN staff to 
hold all expertise needed, nor for the Board to have such expertise in dealing 
with either highly technical or all matters relating to the kinds of 
objectionsthat may be received.  I take note of the broader role of the ICANN 
Board and its fuller set of responsibilities.  The Board must be able to turn 
to, and rely upon independent and expert advice in a wide variety of areas. In 
the area that we are discussing,  I support the need for a quick look/objection 
review process, that draws on highly qualified parties, and relies on a defined 
set of legal instruments that have international legal standing.  
I am not addressing who the third party should be who manages the expert 
process, although I personally consider that a highly administrative matter, 
e.g. the management of the expert process can be separated from the development 
of the pool of experts.  Experience and credibility in such matters, as well as 
international standing should be elements of selecting the third party. 
As I have considered our discussions, I have done some further thinking about a 
possible approach to how the ICANN Board can receive independent, and informed 
input on strings that encounter objections due to linquistic, human rights, or 
other challenges, and have outlined, for discussion at some point, a proposed 
approach of using a panel of independent experts.  To help to define the basis 
of what said experts should take into account, I included a list of 
internationally recognized instruments. 
It isn't realistic to assume that the Board makes decisions without advice. I 
do agree that ultimately the Board votes. but it should be after an informed 
and expert panel advises them. And after any Board decision, there will also be 
the need for an appeals mechanism, which may be an independent entity, as the 
PSC envisioned, or the courts. 
The attached document is merely  for discussion in our work. It isn't intended 
to take over the process, but to contribute to dialogue. 
Marilyn Cade

Attachment: ICANN - STRINGs that encounter objections - review proposal.doc
Description: MS-Word document