[governance] oversight stmt

[karen banks]

hi avri and all

some minor comments, it's becoming a very coherent statement.. we largely 
support it

 >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.

do you mean 6? accountable to international treaties etc?

willie and i talked about this..  and i have made a few comments below..

 >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.

more than that, we need to be ready - if there is some rough concensus, to 
give khan at least a sense of what we're talking about, and tonight if 
possible - is that possible?

and remember, *if* we are going to get text in, and we must, we will 
probably need to submit by no later than late morning tomorrow, if we want 
delegates to have access to it.. and would even suggest, if there is some 
degree of consensus, that we send text directly to amb khan..

karen
-----
note: have corrected typos without noting changes.. other changes noted in []

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 [of?]/by the community of 
Internet users, civil society, the technical community, private sector and 
governments.

I note that carlos' briefing paper on the brazilian forum proposal uses the 
following 4 distinct stakeholder groups - and not CS - ca - why is that? 
and does not include the internet community perse.. (otherwise, they are 
largely the same)

.- National Governments;
- Business associations;
- Non-profit, non-business organizations;
- Academic/technical community.

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.

karenb: suggest the following be a note in italics and not included in the 
paragraph language

[note: 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.

karenb: I would like rikke to take a look at the above if possible (am 
ccing) - do we need to refer to the cybercrime treaty? is is not an 
international treaty (not yet anyway) and the less said about it the better

7. Once all [add: of] the [add: above] conditions [delete:listed above] are 
met, the US Government [add: shall] transfer[del:]s 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 multi-stakeholder community will take part in the process 
through participation in ICANN processes. It is also expected the the 
multistakeholder community will observe and comment on the progress made in 
this process, through the [add: proposed] Forum.


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