[PC-NCSG] proposed GNSO stmt on accountability

[William Drake]

I agree with Maria, of course

Bill

On Jun 24, 2014, at 5:26 PM, Maria Farrell <maria.farrell at GMAIL.COM> wrote:

> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/a88475e7/attachment.html>