[CCWG-ACCT] [WP1] New section - ICANN Community Assembly
mshears at cdt.org
Mon Jul 27 08:28:22 UTC 2015
Agree that having two entities is excessive - that said there are some
differences, as I understand them from the texts/mails:
The ICA is supposed to " be a forum where the use of any of the powers
is discussed across the whole ICANN community – *before* any of the
powers are exercised."
And the PAF is "to bring together board, staff and the SO/ACs in a
public exchange of views and questions and comments about accountability
issues - a sort of open round table, done at an ICANN meeting once a year"
The first is about a potential exercising of a community power, the
second is a more general discussion on accountability matters.
One could merge the two, create something with a more appropriate name
such as ICANN Accountability Forum (as assembly sounds very top down and
UN-like) and make it a once a year OR as appropriate (when a community
power is contemplated being used).
On 7/26/2015 8:09 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> Replies. Alan
> At 25/07/2015 10:53 PM, Jordan Carter wrote:
>> Thank you Keith, Alan for these comments. I've attached some comments
>> back on them. All very helpful.
>> I'm sorry for the confusion around the Public Accountability Forum
>> idea. What I was trying to suggest was that that suggestion be
>> incorporated in the ICA so two "things" aren't being created.
>> From memory, the notion of the Public Accountability Forum was to
>> bring together board, staff and the SO/ACs in a public exchange of
>> views and questions and comments about accountability issues - a sort
>> of open round table, done at an ICANN meeting once a year. The point
>> was to help build mutual accountability across the ICANN system, not
>> just vertical accountability - helping to solve the "who watches the
>> watchers" conundrum.
>> This could easily be done under the umbrella of the ICANN Community
>> Assembly, perhaps with supplementary attendance or speaking rights
>> e.g. for more of the Board, maybe the SO/AC leadership as well.
>> But creating it as a separate beast seems pointless....
>> On 26 July 2015 at 06:54, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
>> <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> > wrote:
>> And a bunch of comments from me.
>> At 25/07/2015 09:03 AM, Drazek, Keith wrote:
>>> Thanks Jordan, this looks very good to me. IÃ¢€™ve made a
>>> few proposed red-lined editsits in the attached, supported
>>> by comments. Happy to discuss further.
>>> From: wp1-bounces at icann.org <mailto:wp1-bounces at icann.org>
>>> [<mailto:wp1-bounces at icann.org>mailto:wp1-bounces at icann.org
>>> <mailto:wp1-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Jordan Carter
>>> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 10:57 PM
>>> To: wp1 at icann.org <mailto:wp1 at icann.org>; Accountability
>>> Cross Community
>>> Subject: [WP1] New section - ICANN Community Assembly
>>> Hi all
>>> I have taken the draft material from an older paper about
>>> the ICANN Community Assembly and pulled it into one place.
>>> Please see attached and debate away! I've tried to be clear
>>> on its solely advisory nature, and have suggested that this
>>> would be the forum to use for the Public Accountability
>>> Forum suggestion made by advisors a while ago.
>> name="5A3 - Community Mechanism - ICANN CommForum-KD-AG-JC.docx"
>> Content-Disposition: attachment;
>> filename="5A3 - Community Mechanism - ICANN CommForum-KD-AG-JC.docx"
>> X-Attachment-Id: f_icjw1ytv2
>> Content-Type: application/pdf;
>> name="5A3 - Community Mechanism - ICANN CommForum-KD-AG-JC.pdf"
>> Content-Disposition: attachment;
>> filename="5A3 - Community Mechanism - ICANN CommForum-KD-AG-JC.pdf"
>> X-Attachment-Id: f_icjw1yu63
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 (0)771 247 2987
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community