[governance] Call for ICANN to Educate and Not Mislead GAC

Mon Aug 25 01:57:05 EDT 2014

FYI...

*Call for ICANN to Educate and Not Mislead GAC*

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20140814_call_for_icann_to_educate_and_not_mislead_gac/

I read with interest the recent blog
<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/update-enhancing-icann-accountability#.U9lCqV_YeVI>
written by Theresa Swinehart a Sr. Advisor to the President on Strategy.
She wrote: "The most critical element of this [ICANN Transition] process is
trust and alignment. To ensure success on this accountability track, we
must as a community work closely together to make sure that the final
process is meaningful. There is plenty of work to be done in an ambitious
period of time."

Post the completion of the ICANN 50 London meeting, I wrote a Commentary on
this forum titled "Thank You GNSO - From the SHE.africa
<http://www.circleid.com/posts/20140703_thank_you_gnso_from_the_she_dot_africa/>”,
endorsing a call by the ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organization
(GNSO) which unanimously endorsed a joint statement in support of the
creation of an independent accountability mechanism. As a former GNSO
member I thanked GNSO for their good efforts and reminded them of DCA
Trust's call for the same mechanisms. This was even before the NTIA
transition became an issue. I also pointed the concerns we expressed to US
Congress. We pointed out in our letter Congress has the overarching
responsibility for the oversight of ICANN. I also commented on some of my
observations from the outcome of the ICANN 50 London meeting regarding the
misleading message that was being conveyed by ICANN CEO on DCA's .africa
gTLD application.

*DCA GAC Responses valuable to ICANN's Accountability improvements*

In a follow up note, I wrote directly to the GNSO to bring to their
attention the above mentioned matters. The letter can be found here
<http://www.dotconnectafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/DotConnectAfrica-Letter-to-GNSO-Note-of-Thanks-on-the-unanimous-endorsement-in-support-of-creation-of-an-Independent-Accountability-mechanism-14-Aug-2014.pdf>
[PDF]. In this letter, I also referenced DCA's response to the recent GAC
Advice conveyed in the GAC London Communiqué on africa. DCA pointed out
specific deficiencies that could be cited in various forms. These included
inappropriate communications, misleading information, incompetency and a
lack of understanding that exists within the ICANN structures in handling
its matters. Our response and observations should be taken in this context,
and in adherence to any accountability and transparency improvement
measures.

It is within this context that I am compelled to post again DCA's case to
shed *more* light on what I think would be of public interest. In
particular the activities of GAC and ICANN's reaction to it.

*Inappropriate GAC Advice on .Africa in London GAC Communiqué, while under
an IRP*

Amid these developments and in a surprising move, the London meeting saw
the GAC give yet another Advice to the ICANN board concerning DCA Trust's
application on .africa, an application which is currently going through
ICANN's Independent Review process (IRP) created by ICANN and set forth in
its Bylaws.

In reality, the IRP is a process for independent third-party review of
Board actions. DCA Trust initiated an IRP seeking that an independent
third-party panel adjudicate the rights that DCA has asserted in its Notice
of IRP, and in particular, the right to have its application treated
fairly, transparently, and with due diligence by ICANN in accordance with
ICANN's Bylaws, Article of Incorporation, and the gTLD Applicant Guidebook.
The IRP is currently ongoing and the discussions and Panel discussions are
hosted both on ICANN and DCA site here
<http://www.dotconnectafrica.org/icann-related-2/independent-review-process-dca-vs-icann/>.

Where the New gTLD Program is concerned, the role of GAC requires the
representatives to understand the gTLD Applicant Guidebook, the ICANN
Bylaws and the IRP process contained therein, a process which as noted is
independent of both ICANN and the applicants. *From the questions raised in
the GAC Advice and in the available transcripts of the various GAC meetings
during ICANN 50 and during past ICANN meetings, it is our deep concern that
ICANN allows the GAC to intervene in ICANN's evaluation and delegation of
new gTLDs without ensuring that the GAC representatives actually understand
ICANN processes.*

*Lack of Proper Education of GAC members*

A lack of proper education is the clear explanation for certain GAC members
urging ICANN to truncate the IRP and/or compromise the independence of the
proceeding, which is according to ICANN, an applicant's only method of
legal recourse. Based upon the GAC's recent actions and advice,
DotConnectAfrica has also raised various questions to ICANN which are of
the public interest.

*ICANN has a duty to educate the members of the Internet community at large
as well as the members of the GAC themselves, as part of its obligation to
act in a transparent and accountable manner.*

It is on this basis and others which we incorporated in our full GAC
response that we felt strongly that the GAC Advice given to ICANN during
ICANN 50 in London demonstrated both the African Union's inappropriate
efforts to determine the outcome of the applications for .africa and
ICANN's improper acquiescence to the GAC's demands. We strongly urged ICANN
not to accept this advice.

*In addition, ICANN must prevent that a GAC member use its position on the
GAC as a tool to promote its own interest, as the African Union has
attempted to do with respect to .Africa, by prompting a GAC advice for
ICANN to delegate .africa to the AU-backed applicant competing with DCA
Trust.*

In summary, we objected to the GAC's advice as improper and showing a
failure on the part of ICANN to adequately educate and inform GAC
representatives. We expect ICANN to decline to follow the London GAC Advice
with regard to .africa, consistent with its obligations under the Bylaws
and other documents governing ICANN and the IRP.

Our response was detailed and the full response can be found here
<http://www.dotconnectafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/DotConnectAfrica-Trust-GAC-Response-August-3-2014.pdf>
[PDF]. Additionally for those following the IRP, the direct links can also
be found here
<http://www.dotconnectafrica.org/icann-related-2/independent-review-process-dca-vs-icann/>.

*By Sophia Bekele <http://www.circleid.com/members/5906/>, CEO of
DotConnectAfrica. Ms. Sophia Bekele is a former ICANN generic Names
Supporting Organization (gNSO) Council policy advisor from 2005-2007 &
contributed to policy over the new gTLD programme and IDNs. She is a
founder and spearhead of the Yes2DotAfrica campaign
<http://www.dotconnectafrica.org/>. Bekele is a business and corporate
executive, an international entrepreneur, a thought leader in Corporate and
ICT Governance, international policy, Business Strategy, Internet, ICT &
development. Her Profiles on sophiabekele.com <http://www.sophiabekele.com>
/ wikipedia <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophia_Bekele>.*

Regards

Gideon Rop

DotConnectAfrica
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140825/1c6dda85/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