Fw: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] ITU-D SECTOR MEMBER APPLICATION

[Ayden Férdeline]

Hi all,

I am forwarding along the below email for information purposes.

Concerns are being raised about ICANN org's recent announcement that it is seeking sector membership to the Telecommunication Development Sector of the International Telecommunications Union. Unfortunately it seems this decision was made by staff without adequate community consultation (and perhaps even without Board approval).

This is not an issue that I am intimately familiar with, but it seems important and it is something that I would like to better understand the implications of.

Do any NCSG members have further information to share on this topic? Thanks.

Ayden

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Friday, March 1, 2019 2:52 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Nigel, many of us, myself included, raised strong concerns about this staff led initiative, which does not reflect the full input of the ICANN Community.
>
> I'd like to have this added to the discussion on this list, BEFORE THE BOARD VOTES, which seems to be over the week end before Kobe -- eg. 7th/8th?
>
> I understand that the proposal is to become a sector member of ITU-D, and I also understand that the work done in that sector is potentially complementary; however, ICANN staff seem to continually assume that the ITU is more important than UNESCO; UNCTAD, WIPO.
>
> It would be helpful to have an overall explanation of ICANN Org recommendation about engagement in the broader suite of UN organizations. Each has a relevance for the ICANN mission/core activities, and hearing from ICANN Org staff how they are addressing engagement with these other UN entities will be exceptionally helpful.
>
> To start, it would be helpful to see ICANN org's responses to questions that have been raised about the risks/benefits described for the broader community in becoming a sector member.
>
> I have seen statements like: "we" don't like to have to ask permission, or "we as staff are uncomfortable with not being treated on an equal footing.  Or, we have a great relationship with the ITU leadership. etc. etc.
>
> I look forward to hearing further explanation about how the community's views were taken into account.
>
> Marilyn Cade
>
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 4:46 PM Nigel Hickson <nigel.hickson at icann.org> wrote:
>
>> Colleagues
>>
>> In respect of previous dialogue on this issue; please see below
>>
>> [https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2019-02-28-en](https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fnews%2Fannouncement-2-2019-02-28-en&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4142537d205641d1ffca08d69df8fe6d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636870090071487814&sdata=cILmD%2Fscdkerqx3hucKAF29zZhhYmgLv%2FJbWVpKyzJM%3D&reserved=0)
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Nigel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>> [https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance](https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-internet-governance&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4142537d205641d1ffca08d69df8fe6d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636870090071497825&sdata=eQO%2BqXao35Q%2FBpfg7iOKIe3veQ5EHwL67n%2Bbak4AmXI%3D&reserved=0)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20190303/3cd7ecd6/attachment.htm>