[PC-NCSG] proposed GNSO stmt on accountability

[Maria Farrell]

Thanks, Robin. I support this statement. (Having read both, I think the
second is clearer and reads better.)


On 24 June 2014 17:06, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> Here is the latest draft of the community stmt.
>
> The entire GNSO join together today calling for the Board to support
> community creation of an independent accountability mechanism that provides
> meaningful review and adequate redress for those harmed by ICANN action or
> inaction in contravention of an agreed upon compact with the community.
>  This deserves the Board's serious consideration - not only does it reflect
> an unprecedented level of consensus across the entire ICANN community, it
> is a necessary and integral element of the IANA transition.
>
> True accountability does not mean ICANN is only accountable to itself, or
> to some vague definition of ?the world,? nor does it mean that governments
> should have the ultimate say over community policy subject to the rule of
> law.   Rather, the Board?s decisions must be open to challenge and the
> Board cannot be in a position of reviewing and certifying its own
> decisions.  We need an independent accountability structure that holds the
> ICANN Board, Staff, and various stakeholder groups accountable under
> ICANN?s governing documents, serves as an ultimate review of Board/Staff
> decisions, and through the creation of precedent, creates prospective
> guidance for the board, the staff, and the entire community.
>
> As part of the IANA transition, the multi-stakeholder community has the
> opportunity and responsibility to propose meaningful accountability
> structures that go beyond just the IANA-specific accountability issues.  We
> are committed to coming together and developing recommendations for
> creation of these mechanisms.  We ask the ICANN Board and Staff to fulfill
> their obligations and support this community driven, multi-stakeholder
> initiative.
>
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2014, at 4:04 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> >
> > ok with me.
> >
> > avri
> >
> >
> >> On 24-Jun-14 15:43, Robin Gross wrote:
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >> Here is the proposed draft statement from the GNSO (the 4 SG's) to the
> >> Board during the Public Forum on ICANN Accountability.   I think we
> >> should support this statement and believe it would be a very powerful
> >> statement from the entire community.  What do you think?  I vote Hell
> Yes.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Robin
> >>
> >> ?We stand before the ICANN Board and Staff today in a rare showing of
> >> unanimity among the GNSO.  As such, the ICANN Board and Staff should
> >> take our statement with appropriate seriousness and consideration.
> >>
> >> We agree that ICANN has earned the trust of NTIA to operate the IANA
> >> functions under a contractual arrangement that could be rebid or
> >> terminated. ICANN has also earned the opportunity to convene the
> >> multi-stakeholder community to help determine future
> >> accountability/stewardship mechanisms.  However, ICANN has NOT YET
> >> earned the trust of the ICANN community to operate the IANA functions
> >> absent new, meaningful and independent accountability structures for the
> >> entire organization.   True accountability does not mean ICANN is only
> >> accountable to itself, or to some vague definition of ?the world,? nor
> >> does it mean that governments should have the ultimate say over
> >> community policy.
> >>
> >> The Board?s decisions must be open to challenge and the Board cannot be
> >> in a position of reviewing and certifying its own decisions.  We need an
> >> independent accountability structure?one that is identified and created
> >> by the community?that holds the ICANN Board, Staff, and various
> >> stakeholder groups accountable under ICANN?s governing documents and
> >> serves as an ultimate review of Board/Staff decisions.  In addition, we
> >> need third-party independent annual operational and detailed financial
> >> audits from a respected firm.
> >>
> >> One of NTIA?s 4 principles is that the recommended IANA transition plan
> >> be multi-stakeholder, so the multi-stakeholder community has the
> >> opportunity and responsibility to propose meaningful accountability
> >> structures that go beyond just the IANA-specific accountability issues.
> >> We the community are committed to coming together and developing
> >> recommendations for creation of these mechanisms.  We ask the ICANN
> >> Board and Staff to fulfill their obligations and support this community
> >> driven, multi-stakeholder initiative.?
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> PC-NCSG mailing list
> >> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> >> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PC-NCSG mailing list
> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20140624/f63cd783/attachment.html>