[governance] fukushima disaster report

[parminder]

On Sunday 08 July 2012 10:35 PM, John Curran wrote:
> On Jul 8, 2012, at 10:48 AM, parminder wrote:
>
>> (snip)
>
> Parminder -
>   Could you elaborate on why you view the present AoC-based review
>   mechanisms as not being "independent and outside" of ICANN?  Also,
>   are there particular improvements you would suggest to improve the
>   independence of same?
>
> Thanks!
> /John

John

In his blog, Milton described accountability under AoC rather 
interestingly :) 
(http://www.internetgovernance.org/2012/05/04/accountability-under-the-affirmation-of-commitments/ 
)

        ASO to NRO: we need to be reviewed!

        NRO to ASO: don't worry, I'll do it

        NRO to ITEMS: here's some money, do a review

        ITEMS to ASO: We talked to both heads, here's your report
        <http://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/ASO-Review-Report-2012.pdf>!

        ASO and NRO: We are now reviewing your review report! Here are
        our comments
        <http://www.nro.net/news/joint-nro-aso-ac-response-to-aso-review-report>

        ITEMS, NRO and ASO: Splendid! Let's have tea!


You can see that review boards are filled by nominees of ICANN 
supporting structures, so I dont know why you ask me what I mean by 
'independent and outside' review.

Well, even applying ICANN's standards elsewhere, in its bylaws dealing 
with independent review through ICDR's independent arbitration rules, 
would be a good start. To quote

    Independent from ICANN (i.e., not an ICANN employee; not a regular
    participant in ICANN's processes; not a member of any ICANN
    Sponsoring Organization or Advisory Committee; not affiliated with
    any registrar or registry holding a contract with ICANN).  (
    http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/mechanisms-experts-eoi-11mar12-en.htm
    )

This I would say is the least. And AoC review boards clearly do not 
conform even to this standard of 'independence' from the ICANN. So who 
is reviewing whom?

(Two members of one of the review boards recently resigned form the 
board to join ICANN! I see that the present CEO of Go daddy registrar 
was a member of accountability review board! Dont know if he was 
concurrently both.)

I also cannot understand how the chair of the board of ICANN, the main 
party to be reviewed and made accountable, can have a veto on choosing 
members of the review board.

Accordingly, we can take it that these 4 review boards are at the most 
internal review boards, for focussing some amount of organisational 
thinking on needed process changes etc. By no stretch of imagination can 
they be considered and proposed as oversight, and accountability 
extracting, bodies, as some people have liberally been doing. We see AoC 
review boards frequently mentioned in discussions over CIR oversight. In 
the above light, this can be considered as wrong, and kind of misleading.

parminder

>
> Disclaimer:  My views alone. No fiscal unions were established in the
> preparation this email.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120709/cee5d116/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t