ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[council] FW: High Level Statements (CCWG-Accountability).

  • To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] FW: High Level Statements (CCWG-Accountability).
  • From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 11:08:33 +0000
  • Accept-language: fr-FR, en-US
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AdAr/Ipa3tF5zVIuQjiCxs7OQ4QwrA==
  • Thread-topic: High Level Statements (CCWG-Accountability).

 Dear Councillors,
On behalf of Jonathan Robinson:
Please see below for text of letter, received today, as approved by the the 
Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability 
Particularly in reference to:
Item 5: UPDATE - Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN 
Accountability (15 mins)
Kind regards,

From: Thomas Rickert [mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 08 January 2015 17:07
To: Lise Fuhr; Jonathan Robinson
Cc: Mathieu Weill; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía
Subject: High Level Statements

Dear Lise and Jonathan,

the Cross Community Working Group on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship) 
and the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability 
(CCWG-Accountability) are regularly liaising and co-ordinating their work as 
both work areas are interdependent and interlinked. The co-chairs of both 
groups have agreed that it would be valuable for the CWG-Stewardship to provide 
the CCWG-Accountability with a list of issues it has identified during its 
deliberations where the work of both group overlaps. Subsequently, the 
following items from the proposal published on Dec. 1st, 2014 have been 

·       Section 3.3 – “Independent Review of Board Actions – the 
CWG-Stewardship may propose that this becomes binding under certain 
circumstances directly related to IANA; no other changes proposed”. If this 
were to be included in the final proposal implementation would require a change 
to the ICANN Bylaws regarding the IRP.

·       Section - Independent certification for delegation and 
re-delegation requests. This is still under consideration by the 
CWG-Stewardship but would be a replacement for the authorization function for 
all changes to the Root Zone or its WHOIS Database currently performed by the 
NTIA. The replacement mechanism would have gTLD requests for delegations and 
re-delegations authorized by an independent third party and its decision on 
these matters would be binding on ICANN/IANA. This would probably require 
modifications to the ICANN Bylaws.

·       Section - Independent Appeals Panel – The CWG-Stewardship is 
proposing that an independent review panel be set up to deal with contested 
changes to the Root Zone or its WHOIS Database. Although discussions are still 
ongoing as to the specifics of such a proposal it is generally agreed that such 
a mechanism should be part of the final proposal and that its decisions would 
be binding. As such this would also require changes to the ICANN Bylaws.

Additionally, the CCWG-Accountability has been advised that "ICANN-only“ 
proposals currently considered might have significant input on the 
Accountability mechanisms required.

Finally, the CWG-Stewardship pointed out that feedback would ideally be 
received early enough to be taken into account when finalizing the proposal to 
be submitted to the ICG.

While the CCWG-Accountability appreciates the sense of urgency and works as 
expeditiously as possible on the tasks it has been chartered with, it is not 
feasible to publish a work results of the group in January.

Nonetheless, the CCWG-Accountability has chosen to publish high level 
statements as a preliminary assessment of the situation.

However, the CCWG-Accountability is cognizant that any preliminary assessment 
might be subject to change because of

- changes made to the proposal published by the CWG-Sterwardship on Dec.1st, 
- other proposals and
- changes due to other external and internal factors, such as evolving 
deliberations of our group.

The below high level statements might be valuable to all groups or individuals 
working on proposals to be submitted to the ICG, which is why they are not only 
a response to the CWG-Stewardship, but published as a status update by the 
1. The CCWG-Accountability noted that a significant number of contributions 
during the two Public Comments on Enhancing ICANN Accountability called for the 
implementation of independent mechanisms enabling to review and, when 
appropriate, redress, decisions from the ICANN Board of Directors. It was often 
noted that these mechanisms should be in place or committed to before the IANA 
Stewardship Transition takes place. The CCWG-Accountability is therefore 
considering addressing this need in its Work Stream 1 (WS1). Unless the 
CWG-Stewardship specifies otherwise, Board decisions that are directly related 
to IANA Functions could be added to the remit of such independent mechanisms 
for the review and redress of decisions of the ICANN Board of Directors, which 
the CCWG-Accountability may address in Work Stream 1. Other issues that were 
brought up by many and could qualify for being in the remit of such mechanism 
were decisions broadening or altering ICANN’s mandate as well as recalling one 
or multiple ICANN Board members. Please note that the legal nature, 
composition, and specific mandate of this mechanism are yet to be determined.
2. The CCWG-Accountability acknowledges the expectation for certain internal 
and / or external review and / or appeals processes to be implemented or 
committed to prior to the transition and will consider these as part of its 
3. Further, we would like to assure you that the CCWG-Accountability output 
will adhere to the following considerations;

·      Any proposal will address the concern on to whom should ICANN be held 

·      Any proposal will address the concern on what should ICANN be held 
accountable for.

·      Any proposal will address the concern on how ICANN or its Board of 
Directors should be held accountable.
We hope this broad but clear roadmap helps the CWG complement their work and 
that we continue to work on a coordinated fashion.
Please note that these statements reflect the current status of deliberations 
of the CCWG-Accountability and might be subject to change for the reasons 
mentioned above and further input from the community.

Kind regards,
Mathieu Weill, León Sánchez and Thomas Rickert
Co-Chars of the CCWG-Accountability

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature.asc

CWG-Stewardship mailing list

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>