[governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments

[Roland Perry]

In message 
<76f819dd0910060927s766d84c3q333480e9611e823f at mail.gmail.com>, at 
09:27:19 on Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>The example of the UK, which seems to have a robust process for
>"striking off" charities not truly acting in the public interest (if I
>understand this correctly) is totally distinguishable from the ICANN
>situation because it is elected representatives in the UK who review
>or authorize the review of the charities and have the ability to
>"nuke" them or remove them from any claim of legitimacy.

The review is not done by elected representatives. Perhaps you will 
think that bad, but it's unusual for "Regulators" to be elected in 
Europe - they are generally appointed by the Government (which *is* an 
elected body, of course).

>Nobody has the ability to remove ICANN's board of directors or
>terminate ICANN without their consent, right?

It was my impression that their new accountability framework did contain 
the possibility to "nuke" the entire Board.

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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