[CCWG-ACCT] Jurisdiction Proposed Questions and Poll Results
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Tue Dec 20 09:29:08 UTC 2016
On Tuesday 20 December 2016 02:15 AM, John Laprise wrote:
>
> I was not disputing the existence of jurisdictional issues. I was
> pointing out the implausibility of the idea that the governments of
> the world would grant jurisdictional immunity to ICANN
>
Only US has to agree, why would other govs not agree, they are the ones
who badly want a global gov system not to be under one gov.
>
> in the absence of precedent.
>
Apart from there being many kinds of precedents, do you know of a
precedent of the Internet, or of ICANN, or of the digitally integrated
global systems .... The world and its governance systems did not grow
always just looking to copy a precedent. They grew by looking outwards,
and innovating.... parminder
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> John Laprise, Ph.D.
>
> Consulting Scholar
>
>
>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/jplaprise/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf
> Of *farzaneh badii
> *Sent:* Monday, December 19, 2016 1:57 PM
> *To:* Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com>
> *Cc:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Jurisdiction Proposed Questions and Poll
> Results
>
>
>
> I am afraid the jurisdictional problems that are faced by certain
> users located in certain countries are not hypothetical. They are real
> problems. As we know about the case of .IR was a very serious case,
> and it is still dragging .... how much uncertainty.IR registrants who
> are mainly from the private sector should go through? Why? And it
> happened because of ICANN jurisdiction nothing else. I am not for
> discussions about changing ICANN's incorporation. But immunity I
> believe should be discussed. If you don't see the problem, it does not
> mean it does not exist. The reason it seems like it is not the problem
> is that those who face them don't know where to go to raise it!
>
>
>
> On 19 December 2016 at 14:49, Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com
> <mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>> wrote:
>
> I believe that requesting views regarding “/providing possible
> jurisdictional immunity”/ are both misleading and outside the
> scope of this WG.
>
>
>
> ICANN based upon the MSM is of necessity an entity that is private
> in nature in which civil society, academia, business, and other
> private parties formulate policy and governments have a secondary
> role to provide advice. The only entities I know other than
> nation-states that enjoy any degree of jurisdictional immunity are
> International Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs) established
> by treaty, and in those organizations governments have the
> controlling role. Hence, pursuit of any type of jurisdictional
> immunity is equivalent to an effort to change the fundamental
> nature of ICANN, as well as being in violation of the key
> condition of the IANA transition, which is that ICANN would not
> become an IGO. In addition, providing ICANN with jurisdictional
> immunity would insulate it from legal process and hence undermine
> accountability.
>
>
>
> Finally, as I know based upon my current tenure as Co-Chair of the
> WG looking at access to curative rights processes by IGOs, when we
> sought expert legal advice on the recognized scope of immunity for
> IGOs we learned that such immunity is not absolute and that the
> scope is based upon the specific fact situation involved as well
> as the national court in which the immunity is claimed. Hence,
> going down this road would require a tremendous amount of
> additional legal research dealing with a variety of hypothetical
> scenarios in separate national jurisdictions.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*
>
> *Virtualaw LLC*
>
> *1155 F Street, NW*
>
> *Suite 1050*
>
> *Washington, DC 20004*
>
> *202-559-8597/Direct*
>
> *202-559-8750/Fax*
>
> *202-255-6172/Cell*
>
> * *
>
> *Twitter: @VlawDC*
>
>
>
> */"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*
>
>
>
> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] *On
> Behalf Of *parminder
> *Sent:* Monday, December 19, 2016 8:10 AM
> *To:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Jurisdiction Proposed Questions and
> Poll Results
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Saturday 17 December 2016 12:40 AM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> John Laprise's wording was much, much better:
>
> "What are the advantages or disadvantages, if any, relating to
> changing ICANN’s jurisdiction*, particularly with regard to
> the actual operation of ICANN’s policies and accountability
> mechanisms?"
>
>
> This formulation does not include possibilities of jurisdictional
> immunity.
>
> Something like
>
> "What are the advantages or disadvantages, if any, relating to
> changing ICANN’s jurisdiction*, */or providing possible
> jurisdictional immunity,/* particularly with regard to the actual
> operation of ICANN’s policies and accountability mechanisms?"
>
>
> would be better.
>
> parminder
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4664/13557 - Release Date:
> 12/08/16
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20161220/5aa6e4ba/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list