[governance] oversight stmt

[carlos a. afonso]

Avri, OK by me (there are two or three minor typos, but this will I am
sure be caught when a final version is made).

Beleza pura! Irado! Matou a pau! É o bicho! ...and other expressions in
Brazilian Portuguese expressing happiness :)

--c.a.

-----Original Message-----
From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
To: Governance Governance Caucus <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:04:04 +0200
Subject: [governance] oversight stmt

> hi,
> 
> i have added the some woring in 5 that i think we can reach agreement
>  
> on. i also added a section 7 that may be more difficult for you to  
> swallow especially those who want an FC.
> 
> i am wondering if there is any chance in this or any other world  
> where we can reach consensus on some text.  the original text is  
> already on the record, so if we can reach agreement of better text,  
> that might be a good thing.
> 
> if possible i would suggest that people recommend specific changes  
> that others can then discuss.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> Political Oversight
> 
> 62b: We recognize that the time has come for a change in the
> political
> oversight of the logical Internet infrastructure. We do not recommend
> the creation of a new oversight organization for domain names and IP
> addresses. However, we do recommend the following changes with regard
> to
> ICANN be implemented in a reasonable time frame:
> 
> 1. The US Government recommits to handing over its pre-eminent role
> of
> stewardship in relation to ICANN.
> 
> 2. ICANN must ensure full and equal multi-stakeholder participation
> on
> its Board and throughout its organizational structure by the
> community
> of Internet users, civil society, the technical community, private
> sector and governments.
> 
> 3. ICANN must ensure that it establishes clear, transparent rules and
> procedures commensurate with international norms and principles for
> fair
> administrative decision-making to provide for predictable policy  
> outcomes.
> 
> 4. ICANN must establish a process for extraordinary appeal of its
> decisions in the form of an independent multi-stakeholder review
> commission, established on a case-by-case basis. Just to be clear, we
> are not calling for an oversight structure, and we don't see an
> independent review process as a path towards that direction.
> 
> 5. ICANN will negotiate an appropriate host country agreement to
> replace its California Incorporation.
> 
> 6. ICANN's decisions, and any host country agreement must be required
> to comply with public policy requirements negotiated through  
> international
> treaties, e.g in regard to human rights treaties,  privacy rights,
> trade
> rules, and cybercrime treaties.  Governement and International  
> organizations,
> including NGOs, would have the right and repsonsibility of bringing  
> violations
> of these requirements to the attention of ICANN and if satisfactory  
> resolution
> cannot be reached using ICANN internal processes, would have the  
> right to
> invoke the appeal process.
> 
> 7. Once all the conditions listed above are met, the US Government
> transfers the IANA function to ICANN.
> 
> 8. It is understood that achieving these
> conditions will rely on negotiations between ICANN and the US  
> Government.  It
> is expected that the International multistakeholder community will  
> take part
> in the process thought participation in ICANN process.  It is also  
> expected
> the the multistakeholder community will observe
> and comment on the progress made in this process through the Forum.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance


_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance