[CCWG-Accountability] Regarding Board treatment of the output of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability

[Bruce Tonkin]

Hello Kavouss,

>>  I have noted that many of us still have not properly realized the scope and sphere of accountability
See below what can be designated the original or   core «sense of accountability is that associated with the process of being called to “account” to some authority for one’s action Such accountability has a number of features:


For sake of discussion, I will use the definition of accountability from:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accountability

“In governance, accountability has expanded beyond the basic definition of "being called to account for one's actions".     It is frequently described as an account-giving relationship between individuals, e.g. "A is accountable to B when A is obliged to inform B about A’s (past or future) actions and decisions, to justify them, and to suffer punishment in the case of eventual misconduct".



>>  It is external, it involves social interactions, and exchange and it implies rights of asserting in those calling for an account are asserting rights of superior authority in those calling for an “account «over those who are accountable including the rights of demand answers and to raw consequences ,possibly, including the imposition of sanctions

Not sure how you are defining "external" here.

For example, a national Government could be said to be primarily accountable to the citizens of the nation.   I would have thought that was "internal" to the jurisdiction of the national Government.     Now there may in addition be some external accountability mechanisms - e.g. if a nation is violating an  international treaty, other nations may impose some form of economic sanctions.

Many non-profit membership organizations -e.g. ISOC - are accountable to their members.   The members are not staff members or Board directors,  so to that extent they could be considered external - but I would think that the members are actually the fundamental  part of the organization - ie internal.   Organizations must also obey the national laws in the regions where they operate - so to that extent there are also external mechanisms of accountability and consequences should there be any misconduct..

ICANN itself doesn’t directly has members, but the supporting organisations and advisory committees that make up ICANN do have members.   So the SOs and ACs  could be said to be accountable to their members.   The SOs and ACs directly elect some ICANN Board members, and other Board members are appointed by a nominating committee that is drawn from the SOs and ACs.

So I think there are a range of internal and external accountability mechanisms - but I think ICANN today at least is primarily held accountable by people in the  ICANN  community that are members of the SOs and ACs.


>>  Accountability is described as involving justification of an action’s performance vis a vis others, the assessment of judgment if that performance against certain standards and possible imposition of consequences if the actor fails to live up to applicable standards.

Makes sense to me.


>>  I wish to comment on your statement that ICANN may reject a Recommendation if it is against public interest.
What are the criteria based on which ICANN  could decide that a given Recommendation is against public interest?

As noted in other posts,  ultimately I think it is up to the ICANN community to develop some clearer definitions of public interest in the context of ICANN's mission.

For now the Board members will need to make their own judgement, but the Board itself is drawn from the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees of ICANN, and also draws people from a range of geographical regions with a range of cultural backgrounds.   Any decision made here would be a collective view of the Board taking into account the various perspectives Board members may have on the general definition of "public Interest".     As noted here :  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_interest the public interest at a general level can be defined as the  welfare or well-being of the general public.


>>  There are many unanswered questions.

There are indeed.   I look forward to hearing the group answer some of these in the course of its work.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin