[CCWG-ACCT] Special Community Leaders CAll - 6 October - Shared Materials

Nigel Roberts nigel at channelisles.net
Wed Oct 7 14:21:13 UTC 2015


What's the point of a whistleblowing process if there's no one with a 
big stick to listen to the whistle?



On 07/10/15 15:01, Ron Baione wrote:
> An idea I had was to include in the process some sort of mandatory monthly collaboration with a secure external whistleblower process.  It is perceived that ICANN members would be somewhat more suceptible to unlawful pressure by governments or inter-governmental entities post-transition.
>
> Having an external process might help gain public and U.S. government trust in the transition and accountability process.  Whistle-blower websites and reporters exist around the globe, and have been the subject of much controversy, but in a multistakeholder controlled external whistleblower process, you could have:
>
> 1)  A monthly process where a conjunction of 60 legit and diverse privacy groups are placed in a pool of availability
>
> 2) 5 privacy organizations would then be chosen at random each month, by algorithm or out of a hat to act as possible external whistleblowers for the ICANN community
>
> 3) Each of the 60 privacy groups must sign a non-disclosure contract with ICANN regarding the provision of their services at any given time
>
> 4) The names of the 60 privacy groups would be publicly known, published on January 1st each year,
>
> 5) It would not be lawful for those groups to reveal if they are that monthly representative, or risk losing their incentive to participate in the process, an jncentive which would be non-monetary.
>
> 6) The incentive would be, i suppose, the credibility gained for their organization by being considered worthy of external whistleblower stewardship
>
> 7) An ICANN led review process of which privacy groups are chosen and retained year over year would be conducted by the CCWG.
>
> 8) Since the model is for the creation of a a random selection process, groups could theoretically serve 12 times a year, therefore a limit on number of months a single organization could serve a whistleblower function would be capped at 8 months of service.
>
> 9) There would be a code-of-conduct signed by each organization allowing for automatic vote by CCWG on removal from the pool of organizations of an organization or retinment, for example, if an organization for failed to renew or delayed its renewal of its local registration or enacted or amended their bylaws, failed to submit requested information in a timely fashion, or acted in a way that was contrary to supporting a free and open internet.
>
> Ron
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>



More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list