[PC-NCSG] PC deliberation: NCSG statement on Geographic Regions - 22/03

[Sam Lanfranco]

Marilia and colleagues,

In my individual capacity I am in support of the NCSG statement on 
Modifications to ICANN?s Geographic Regions Framework. I of course 
strongly support the calls for more inclusiveness both in terms of 
representation and in the processes use within ICANN for arriving at 
representation. I however still have a concern which I stated at the 
start of the NSCG review of the geographic regions document.

While regional representation should respect the broad principles of 
diversity and inclusiveness, it should also reflect the purposes of 
representation within ICANN. Representation should reflect a ?form 
follows function? approach to the designation of regions. What appears 
to remain unclear is what are the rights and obligations of regional 
membership, both on the part of the regional member and on the part of 
ICANN? Is simply saying "the right to participate in multistakeholder 
Internet governance within ICANN's remit" enough here? When a regional 
entity confronts making a choice among regions, what should they be 
considering in terms of their future relationship with ICANN and with 
their regional colleagues? What should ICANN expect in terms of its 
obligations and and the participation of the regional entity?  Am I 
wrong in thinking that something has been left under defined here?

Sam L (NPOC)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160424/1be9271e/attachment.html>