[governance] Potential IGC letter to US gov (was Re: NET NEUTRALITY AND MORE)

[William Drake]

Hi Mawaki

On Jun 1, 2013, at 6:42 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>  
> My question, and tentative answer, was predicated on the notion that there is no issue with the role of the other stakeholders within ICANN (see constituency structures),

One could argue that equitable accountability to the full range of nongovernmental stakeholders still needs, um, a wee bit of work :-(  

> but only with governments. But maybe you're right suggesting that the whole framework be redefined for all stakeholders at once. In which case, this will have to be a more complex exercise which will require that the whole thorn that is "respective roles and responsibilities" be removed or all aspects resolved once for all.

While R3 has proven to be as open to abuse as expected, with regard to institutional design of a global AoC it'd presumably require some local clarification and codification.

>  
> The solution you're proposing suggests to me two opposing lines of argument:
>  
> 1. Governments have no particular role to play: the authoritative body to which ICANN will commit to in an AoC type agreement will be a multistakeholder one where all stakeholders are represented on equal footing, government being just one of the stakeholders. (This seems more like what is implied in that proposed solution.) In the best of worlds, I can go with this assuming that sound mechanisms are found to fairly distribute representation across stakeholder groups and regions.
>  
> 2. Governments have a particular role to play: the very purpose of the GAC assumes that as well as the current role of USG/DoC since its position for ICANN oversight is held by USG alone not a multistakeholder body (i.e. USG surrounding itself with a sample of other stakeholders to collectively carry out the oversight function.) Therefore the next step would just be about extending that unique governmental mission so far in the hands of a single government to a body representing the governments of the world.

Hmm…I wonder how hard this binary has to be.  How about if they play a particular but in most dimensions equal role?  
>  
> To which 'position 1' may respond: Well, no! That arrangement may have been necessary at the early stage of ICANN experiment till certain maturity. Now we have reached that time where we need to move forward with an affirmative and autonomous multistakeholder structure, etc. And that's where all the ingenuity of the actors involved will be needed to get to a consensus or at least an agreement.

No question, ingenuity will be needed.

Cheers,

Bill
>  
> 
>  
>  
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 1:46 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> Hi Mawaki
> 
> On Jun 1, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Would a multilateral AoC between ICANN and GAC make sense?
> 
> I'd argue a multistakeholder one evolved from the current structure if/as greater confidence and trust are built would be better.  This has been a subject of some consideration in relevant capitals, IGF sessions, etc.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Bill 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

**********************************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
  Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
  University of Zurich, Switzerland
Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, 
  ICANN, www.ncuc.org
william.drake at uzh.ch  
www.williamdrake.org
***********************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130602/e650ab6b/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