AW: [governance] Burr & Cade: proposal for introducingmulti-lateral oversight of the root

Avri Doria avri at psg.com
Thu Jul 27 10:09:35 EDT 2006


<personal opinion>

On 27 jul 2006, at 08.33, Wolfgang Kleinw├Ąchter wrote:

> Wolfgang:
>
>
>
> One of the option would be to have something like a "seat  
> agreement" like the UN has in NYC. This is one option, but normally  
> not the practice for non-govenrmental or private organisaitons but  
> only for intergovernmental organisaiton operating under the Vienna  
> Convention (which guarantees also diplomatic status to its  
> employees). If you would prefer such a solution, you have to change  
> ICANN into an intergovernmentl body. I would prefer to "invent"  
> something which creates new procedures and practices, based on  
> (good and bad) existing experiences from the 20st century diplomacy.


i don't think this is at all the case.  there are many instances of  
independent international organizations that are have host country  
agreement where they are governened by their by-laws and the  
agreement they set with the country/countries that they make the  
agreement with.  among the rules these international organizations  
can commit to are international law.  and among the rules they can  
agree to not be bound by are the ones that are based nationalist  
laws.  the best know example is the Internation Red Cross.  And my  
favorite, lesser known example is the international potato center (CIP).

i think organization like this are international organizations but  
are not intergovernmental.

a.


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance



More information about the Governance mailing list