<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:10pt">Hi all, <br><br>I believe that GAC should have more membership from different Nations. <br>However, any veto power from Governments within the international public policy related to Internet would make it loose its traditional dynamism.<br>Regards.<br><div> </div>NKURUNZIZA Jean Paul<br><br><div>Tel : +257 79 981459<div><br></div><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">De :</span></b> "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">À :</span></b> governance@lists.cpsr.org<br><b><span style="font-weight:
bold;">Envoyé le :</span></b> Ven 8 octobre 2010, 17h 41min 59s<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Objet :</span></b> [governance] ITU vs. ICANN<br></font><br>"US and Russia face off over ICANN veto power<br><br> <br><br>Kevin Murphy, October 6, 2010, 13:14:29 (UTC), Domain Policy <br><br>The ruling body of the International Telecommunications Union this week kicked off a major policy-making meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico, and has already seen the US and Russia taking opposing stances over the future control of ICANN.<br><br> <br><br>A group of former Soviet nations, chaired by the Russian Federation's Minister of Communications, seems to have proposed that the ITU should give itself veto power over ICANN decisions.<br><br> <br><br>A proposal filed by the Regional Commonwealth in the field of Communications (RCC) calls for the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee to be scrapped and replaced by an ITU group.<br><br> <br><br>Consideration
should be given to the expediency of having the functions of GAC carried out by a specially-constituted group within ITU with the authority to veto decisions adopted by the ICANN Board of Directors. If it is so decided, the ITU Secretary-General should be instructed to consult ICANN on the matter.<br><br> <br><br>The proposal was first noted by Gregory Francis at CircleID. <br><br> <br><br>It says that the GAC is currently the only avenue open to governments to "defend their interests" but that it has "no decision-making authority and can do no more than express its wishes".<br><br> <br><br>It also notes that fewer than 50% of nations are members of the GAC, and that only 20% or fewer actually participate in GAC meetings.<br><br> <br><br>The proposal was apparently submitted to the ongoing ITU Plenipotentiary Conference but, in contrast to ICANN's policy of transparency, many ITU documents are only accessible to its members.<br><br> <br><br>A reader was
kind enough to send me text extracted from the document. I've been unable to verify its authenticity, but I've no particular reason to believe it's bogus.<br><br> <br><br>The RCC was set up in 1991 to increase cooperation between telecommunications and postal operators in the post-Soviet era. Its board is comprised of communications ministers from a dozen nations.<br><br> <br><br>Its position on ICANN appears to be also held by the Russian government. Igor Shchegolev, its communications minister, is chair of the RCC board.<br><br> <br><br>At the Plenipotentiary on Tuesday, Shechegolev said (via Google Translate): <br><br> <br><br>We believe that the ITU is capable of such tasks to international public policy, Internet governance, its development and finally, protection of interests of countries in ICANN. <br><br> <br><br>Meanwhile, the US has committed itself to the multi-stakeholder model of internet governance as embodied by ICANN. The State
Department's Philip Verveer told the conference:<br><br> <br><br>the ITU should be a place where the development of the Internet is fostered. The Internet has progressed and evolved in a remarkably successful way under the existing multi-stakeholder arrangements. Changes, especially changes involving inter-governmental controls, are likely to impair the dynamism of the Internet-something we all have an interest in avoiding. <br><br> <br><br>ICANN itself has no formal presence at the Plenipotentiary, after ITU secretary-general Hamadoun Toure turned down a request by ICANN president Rod Beckstrom for observer status.<br><br> <br><br>The conference carries on until October 22. It's likely that we haven't heard the last of the anti-ICANN rhetoric."<br><br>____________________________________________________________<br>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br> <a ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br> <a ymailto="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br><br>For all list information and functions, see:<br> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br><br>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br></div></div></div>
</div><br>
</body></html>