[governance] Dynamic Coallition on ICANN Accountability and International Conformity - IAIC

[Danny Younger]

Interesting.  ICANN puts up a public forum dealing with Proposed Bylaw Changes to Improve Accountability and not a single member of this community posts any comments whatsoever.  Instead, community members tell us about plenary activities that are held that still don't result in any meaningful comments on accountability being put through directly to ICANN in a timely fashion.  

If you really cared about ICANN Accountability one would think that you would be conveying your concerns directly to ICANN when the opportunity presented itself.  Comments may be sent to iic-proposed-bylaws at icann.org until 25 September.





--- On Tue, 9/15/09, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com>
> Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coallition on ICANN Accountability and International Conformity - IAIC
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Date: Tuesday, September 15, 2009, 9:16 AM
> Dear Members,
> 
> As per the proceedings of the EuroDIG.org plenary no 3 on
> The Post-JPA
> Phase: towards a future Internet Governance Model, there
> has been
> discussion amongst the European Governments and
> participants about the
> role of ICANN and more accountability of it in terms of
> Internet
> Governance Forum. There has a need been identified for
> creation of a
> "Dynamic Coallition on ICANN Accountability and
> International
> Conformity - IAIC" (though proposed in its structure here
> more
> sensibly) at the IGF in order to deal with the ICANN
> related issues
> more strategically, tactically with a multistakeholder
> participation
> within the light of the Tunis Agenda or if not within this
> context but
> then realizing that  although ICANNs constitutional
> documents and
> by-laws require it to co-operate with relevant
> international
> organisations and to carry out its activities in conformity
> with
> relevant principles of international law and applicable
> international
> conventions and local law, there are no related formal
> accountability
> arrangements and this can be the first step to create this
> process.
> 
> IGF process needs to be kept separate but interconnected
> with ICANN
> (though this comment is still very vague).
> 
> Your suggestions on this proposal would be really useful
> and I am
> circulating this to other IG related lists for input and
> participation.
> 
> -- 
> Regards.
> --------------------------
> Fouad Bajwa
> @skBajwa
> Answering all your technology questions
> http://www.askbajwa.com
> http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 



____________________________________________________________
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