[governance] oversight stmt

[Avri Doria]

Actually that was an added section 5 and 6 and 8.

i wrote the note and then added more stuff.
apologies for the confusion.

a.

On 28 sep 2005, at 17.04, Avri Doria wrote:

> 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