Accounting before the fact

[Garth Graham <garth.graham@xxxxxxxxx>]

ICANN’s open processes of policy development and decision-making provide a 
basis for an important dimension of accountability that’s not usually 
recognized – ACCOUNTABILITY BEFORE THE FACT. < 
http://www.centreforpublicaccountability.org>
 
Conventionally, being accountable is assumed to be about answering for actions 
after the fact.  But the public comment processes that ICANN already follows 
allow its internal “communities” to explore future organizational intentions 
and the impact questions of who benefits and who pays to a more intense degree 
than most organizations.  Those conversations can be the basis of a formal 
explanation of intentions and their expected impact (of a equity statement 
described as such at the conclusion of policy formulation) before the fact.  
This provides a scale of measurement of successful achievement of results that 
emerges from within the issue or situation that provoked the suggested policy 
change, which can be applied after the fact of its implementation.
 
To the degree that ICANN answers to its own internal communities, such a 
statement and measurement scale would represent a summary of (rough?] consensus 
and a standard to judge the consequences of running (i.e. implementing) the 
code(ification) of policy.  It might also simplify the problem of explaining 
ICANN’s actions to a “global” public.

Garth Graham