CPSR COMMENT ON ICANN RULES FOR NOMINATIONComputer Professionals for Social Responsibility
(CPSR)
http://www.cpsr.org
DNS Working
Group
24 May 2000
contact: Hans Klein
hklein@cpsr.org
CPSR here offers comments on both the ICANN Nominating Committee
(NomCom)and the proposed rules for self-nomination.
PART I. GENERAL COMMENTS ON
NOMINATIONS
1. ICANN SHOULD DEFINE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD
ICANN has defined two
ways of obtaining a nomination for the At Large elections (via NomCom and self-nomination).
These are likely to offer different degrees of ease of nomination, offering some
potential candidates benefits not available to others. This unequal access
is regrettable.
CPSR calls for ONE, CONSISTENT set of rules for nominations.
There should be a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD for elections, so that no individuals or constituency
begin with an advantage.
2. CROSS-CONSTITUENCY INTERVENTION IS UNDESIRABLE
ICANN's
elected Board represents only constituencies in the Names, Addresses, and Protocols
supporting organizations. Through the NomCom, these constituencies are directly
influencing the election of ICANN's user constituency (the At Large membership.)
This
cross-constituency intervention sets a dangerous precedent. In the future the
Internet User constituency will control nine Board seats and will be in a favored
position to similarly intervene in other constituencies' elections. This practice
should be avoided at the outset.
3. CPSR RECOMMENDS THAT THE NOMCOM NOT EXERCISE
ITS POWERS
It may be too late to undo the NomCom. However, the NomCom could
refrain from exercising its nominating powers. The At Large elections will
be more fair. ICANN as a whole will benefit from avoiding such an unwise practice.
4.
NOMCOM APPOINTEES COULD SUFFER LOSS OF LEGITIMACY
Since NomCom appointees will
not be nominated by the At Large Membership, they will have a weak claim to be legitimate
representatives of the membership. They will not have been nominated on a level
playing field. In contrast, candidates nominated by At Large Members will have a
legitimate base of support in the At Large membership.
Individuals accepting
NomCom appointment as a candidate risk being perceived as owing allegiance to the
non-user constituencies that select them. That would be an appropriate issue
in the nominations process.
PART II. SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON SELF-NOMINATIONS
Rule
1:
"1. The self-nomination process will begin no later than ten days after the
announcement of the Nominating Committee's nominations, and will last one month in
duration."
Comment on Rule 1:
The NomCom appointees will have TWICE as much
time to campaign (July 20 to September 20) as the popularly-nominated candidate (August
20 to September 20). This is blatantly unfair.
Rule 9.
"To obtain a place on
the final ballot, an individual seeking self-nomination must meet the following conditions:
a.Support
from 10% of the At Large Members in her/his geographic region, as defined by the
ICANN Bylaws;"
Comment on Rule 9:
This number -- 10% of the membership -- is
high. First, given the ease with which individuals can become At Large Members,
there may be many members with little commitment to the election. There is likely
to be a low voter turnout, especially in the nomination process. Turnout for
the nomination vote could easily be as low as 20-30% of eligible voters. (In
the United States, turnout for primary elections is often in this range.) Thus,
candidates would have to attract a very large percentage of actual voters (as high
as half) to pass the threshold of 10% of all members.
Second, this number is high
in an absolute sense. In political systems with such threshold requirements
the figure is often 5% of votes cast (vs. 10% of all possible votes.)
Third, the
10% figure defines a moving target, because the Membership will likely grow rapidly
during the campaigns. Presently, there is little public awareness of the ICANN
elections. As media coverage of the campaigns increases, the number of members
will probably increase rapidly, and nominees will find themselves chasing a moving
threshold. Since it is desirable to increase registration, the moving target
problem can be avoided by setting a fixed threshold.
RECOMMENDATION:
CPSR recommends that the threshold for self-nomination nomination be the LOWER of
the following two numbers:
a) 10% of all At Large members registered by 22 May
2000. Those registration figures are as follows:
COUNT
REGION
357 Africa
1832 Asia and Pacific
6775
Europe
325 Latin America and the Caribbean
7630 North America
or
b) 5% of the actual number of voters
that voted in the nomination process.
To summarize these comments:
1. ICANN
SHOULD DEFINE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD
2. CROSS-CONSTITUENCY INTERVENTION IS UNDESIRABLE
3.
CPSR RECOMMENDS THAT THE NOMCOM NOT EXERCISE ITS POWERS
4. NOMCOM APPOINTEES COULD
SUFFER LOSS OF LEGITIMACY
5. CPSR recommends that the threshold for self-nomination
nomination be the LOWER of the following two numbers:
a) 10% of all At Large members
registered by 22 May 2000. Those registration figures are as follows:
COUNT REGION
357 Africa
1832 Asia and Pacific
6775
Europe
325 Latin America and the Caribbean
7630 North America
b) 5% of the actual number of voters that
voted in the nomination process.
* * *
* * *