<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 19 June 2016 09:17 PM, Phil
Corwin wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:8E84A14FB84B8141B0E4713BAFF5B84E2102CA94@Exchange.sierracorporation.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1106736553;
mso-list-template-ids:1068398616;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Paraminder:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">You
keep advocating for ICANN to be transferred to
“international jurisdiction”, but can you go beyond that
slogan and articulate exactly what organizational form and
subject to what enforcement authority you refer?</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Phil,<br>
<br>
Thanks for your interest in this subject. As noted by Seun, in fact
I have discussed my proposed organisational form on several elists,
like ISOC policy list, ALAC, and IG civil society lists, and so it
is not just a slogan. But I do understand that institutional changes
are a slow and laborious processes, and I am happy to describe it
all over again, especially when this space is now officially
mandated to discuss this issue. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:8E84A14FB84B8141B0E4713BAFF5B84E2102CA94@Exchange.sierracorporation.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p>I
presume that you are not advocating that ICANN relocate its
legal jurisdiction to that of another nation, as that would
simply raise the same concerns that you have expressed in
regard to the U.S. legal system (not U.S. Government
control, as you incorrectly infer) within the context of a
different nation-state.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
You are right. Taking it to another nation would not solve the
problem, and doing that is *not* my proposal. Though with a small
caveat. A county like Switzerland voluntarily offers jurisdictional
immunity to international organisations like the Red Cross, and that
kind of a thing though not ideal is still better than the present
situation. It is open for the US government to propose such an
arrangement. <br>
<br>
As to your correcting me about "US legal system" and "not US
government control", I dont think I used the word "control" in any
of my emails. As for government, it is my understanding that this
term included all branches of the state, legislative, judicial and
executive. As my email says "... US jurisdiction (meaning US
government, its all branches)...". Even speaking about just the
executive branch, do remember that their remit also equally applies
over ICANN, for instance that of the Office of the Foreign Assets
Control. Remember also that the FCC may have forborne from
exercising its authority on Internet names and numbers, it
nevertheless has it, and can apply it when it wants. And so on. An
endless number of executive bodies may have such remit. <br>
<br>
Also, as bit of an aside, it is interesting to note that with
respect to the US gov's role, it is never 'US gov control', even
when, as at present, their role is direct and that of the principal
in the whole set up of names and numbers. One the other hand, the
slightest mention of the lightest role of the UN, and it is directly
elevated to 'UN control'... If we have to undertake the
'jurisdiction' discussion seriously, *in this international forum*,
I think we need to adopt a more neutral attitude and vocabulary.
Aside ends.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:8E84A14FB84B8141B0E4713BAFF5B84E2102CA94@Exchange.sierracorporation.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">If
you are advocating that ICANN become a UN-type IGO then such
a result is directly contradictory to the conditions set by
the NTIA for the transition – and if there is widespread
support for such a bait-and-switch result we should all know
it now before the transition occurs.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
No, I do not propose ICANN to become an IGO. I propose framing of
international law, no doubt in an inter-gov manner (to which US gov
will have to give assent, initially, as well as to any later
amendments, which can be rendered constitutionally difficult) which
recognises ICANN in, more or less, exactly the same form as it is
now, *exactly the same multistakeholder form*. Such form is to be
inscribed in the incorporating law - for ever. Would you consider
current or even post-transition ICANN to be a gov body, since it is
incorporated under a gov made and administered law? (You and others
are not ready to consider it a gov body even when, as currently, it
functions directly as a contractor of the US gov - what is rather
worse than double standards. Shows how hopelessly loaded this debate
is. )<br>
<br>
I have to repeat what I said earlier in this thread:<br>
<br>
When ICANN can be considered multistakeholder, and not a gov
organisation, even when incorporated under US law, and subject to
it, laws which are not only made only by governments , but also can
any time be changed by them <br>
<br>
why can ICANN not be considered multistakeholder, as incorporated
under international law, and similarly made in and by an inter-gov
system. <br>
<br>
Therefore, my proposal does not contradict conditions set by NTIA
because it does not "replace the NTIA role with a government-led or
an inter-governmental organization solution". What it seeks to
replace is the US jurisdiction, something nowhere mentioned in the
NTIA conditions. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:8E84A14FB84B8141B0E4713BAFF5B84E2102CA94@Exchange.sierracorporation.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Making
ICANN subject to international jurisdiction also raises the
question of what adjudication forum would address relevant
legal disputes, which in ICANN’s case are primarily of
contract interpretation and enforcement. The International
Criminal Court would not be relevant; and the International
Court of Justice only permits nation-states to be parties
before it.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
The Internet is a major and unique new global phenomenon - almost
setting off a new social epoch. Its governance will require
innovations, but these are best done within democratic norms, and
building on existing democratic institutions. We will need to work
on the means of solving legal disputes, and be open to new
institutional forms.<br>
<br>
Much development has been taking place on managing private disputes
in the international space in the area of Investor State Dispute
Settlement (ISDS). It has a history of many years, going back
decades, especially with the World Bank's <span class="st">The
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes.
Currently, most trade treaties have some ISDS provisions. And
jurisprudence in this area is evolving fast. The EU recently
proposed a two tier 'Investment Court System' populated by regular
judges. Domain related disputes are much less contentious that
investor-state disputes. Setting up a treaty based court for the
purpose of solving ICANN related dispute will not be difficult,
and can be done by the same treaty that sets the international law
to incorporate ICANN as an international body. It could perhaps
even be possible to make spaces within the International Court of
Justice, by making suitable amendments to its mandate. Many things
are possible. We need to first make value based choices and decide
to move in that direction. You cannot have systems and
institutions all in place, ready to be switched on pressing of a
button, even before you make principles based decision to move
towards a more intentionally democratic and legitimate system. </span><br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:8E84A14FB84B8141B0E4713BAFF5B84E2102CA94@Exchange.sierracorporation.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p><br>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">There
is also the issue of recognition of ICANN’s proposed
“international jurisdiction” status. Generally, in the
instance of organizations created by multilateral treaty,
each nation has the option of recognizing and participating
in the arrangement – or not.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
It is not as if non US countries have currently formally recognised
ICANN's US jurisdiction. But the system is working, isnt it. It
would still work with an international ICANN even with countries
that may not recognise and participate in the new arrangements.
Though I dont see why any country wont participate. Or are you
thinking that some countries may get so unhappy that ICANN has moved
out of US jurisdiction to an international one that they may
withdraw from accepting ICANN's names and numbers services? (Sorry,
rhetorical). <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:8E84A14FB84B8141B0E4713BAFF5B84E2102CA94@Exchange.sierracorporation.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">My
own views on this subject are quite clear </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I hope mine are clear too. But always happy to explain and clarify
further. The email is already too long. I will respond to the points
you make below in a separate one, later..<br>
<br>
regards, parminder <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:8E84A14FB84B8141B0E4713BAFF5B84E2102CA94@Exchange.sierracorporation.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">–
see
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20160523_the_irritating_irresolution_of_icann_jurisdiction/">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20160523_the_irritating_irresolution_of_icann_jurisdiction/</a>
:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.25in"><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">For
the sake of legal clarity and organizational stability, it
is incumbent upon WS2 participants to resolve this matter
as soon as feasible — and to come down decisively in favor
of a permanent link between ICANN and U.S. jurisdiction.
If this were a matter of first impression then impartial
consideration of an alternative national jurisdiction
might be in order. But it is a not a matter of first
impression, and multiple factors weigh in favor of
enshrining ICANN's permanent status as a California
non-profit corporation in a Fundamental Bylaw:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#1F497D;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1"><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">ICANN
has embodied California non-profit status since its
founding in 1998<o:p></o:p></span></i></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#1F497D;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1"><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">With
the EC and PTI required to be California non-profits by
revised Fundamental Bylaws, an inconsistent status for
ICANN itself could raise confounding legal and policy
issues for both accountability and control<o:p></o:p></span></i></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#1F497D;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1"><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">The
accountability plan has been designed to be maximally
effective in the context of California law<o:p></o:p></span></i></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#1F497D;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1"><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">The
U.S. legal system is well regarded for its dedication to
objective determinations under the rule of law<o:p></o:p></span></i></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#1F497D;mso-list:l0 level1
lfo1"><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Perhaps
most importantly, the First Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution guarantees that the U.S. government cannot
take actions that would coerce ICANN into using its root
zone control to abridge free speech.<o:p></o:p></span></i></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">If
you are going to advocate for ignoring all the points cited
above and ICANN’s transfer to “international jurisdiction”
then I would respectfully ask that you go beyond that phrase
and enlighten us all as to exactly what form this would
take, how it would be achieved, how it would ensure that
ICANN would not become subject to governmental control, and
in which venue contract and other legal disputes pertaining
to ICANN would be resolved? You state, “There are hundreds
of international organizations functioning under
international law, and so can ICANN”, but can you go beyond
that and provide examples of relevant examples for ICANN
that are not UN agencies and thereby subject to multilateral
political influence?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Until
you provide us with the “simple logic” of such further
details I must regard your advocacy as merely rhetorical
with no well-considered substance behind it, and thereby
incapable of amassing consensus support within an ICANN
community that has just labored two-plus years to create
transition and accountability proposals that are firmly
rooted in U.S. jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Sincerely,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Philip
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Philip
S. Corwin, Founding Principal</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Virtualaw
LLC</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">1155
F Street, NW</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Suite
1050</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Washington,
DC 20004</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">202-559-8597/Direct</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">202-559-8750/Fax</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">202-255-6172/Cell</span></b><b><span
style="color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Twitter:
@VlawDC</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">"Luck
is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey</span></i></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>parminder<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, June 19, 2016 3:12 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Seun Ojedeji<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The Economist | A
virtual turf war: The scramble for .africa<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sunday 19 June 2016 12:11 PM, Seun
Ojedeji wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p>Hello Parminder,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>As an African, I would tend to agree with your point and
wish that your conclusion point was the case (as a reactive
measure). However as you know, we have discussed this
extensively in the past (on different fora) and we found
that the means to the end of such is so complicated and the
end itself would ultimately create a govt lead ICANN which i
certainly don't want.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
If ICANN functioning under California non profit law - made by
government - and subject to US jurisdiction - also made of and
by governments (and governments alone) - can continue to be
seem and treated as a multistakeholder organisation, to your
and others' satisfaction, there is simply no reason why ICANN
cannot be and function similarly under international
jurisdiction, created by international law.<br>
<br>
Your preferring US law/ jurisdiction over international law/
jurisdiction is, simply and nothing more than, a statement of
your preferring the US jurisdiction over international
jurisdiction ( which, while you have a right to your choices,
I consider democratically unfortunate). None is less complex
that the other. There are hundreds of international
organisations functioning under international law, and so can
ICANN. And if ICANN has some special contexts and needs, that
would be met by relevant innovations in international law, but
not by a democratic regression to subjecting the world to the
US law. Democracy is precious, and people have done much to
achieve it. Please dont treat it lightly, citing
technicalities against it. That is extremely unfortunate.
Sorry for the analogy but it directly applies; every tyrant/
dictator is prone to argue that democracy is messy, and
difficult and, as you say, complicated. But such an argument
does not carry, does it.<br>
<br>
To call an ICANN which is constituted under US law, and fully
answerable to US jurisdiction (meaning US government, its all
branches), as fully multistakeholder;<br>
<br>
and, at the same time, an ICANN functioning exactly in the
same manner, but now under international law and jurisdiction,
as (to quote you) becoming a government let ICANN
<br>
<br>
is simply to make a misleading statement. <br>
<br>
Although, the fallacy contained in it is as clear as daylight,
among status quoists circles this statement or argument
continues to be made and re-made. But, for other than the
fully converted and therefore impervious to simple logic, and
demands of that high value of democracy, it takes away
nothing from the my arguments regarding the unfairness of
ICANN being subject to US jurisdiction, and the urgent need to
move it to international jurisdiction, which you are right, I
have often made on various fora, and will keep making. It is a
political act. <br>
<br>
regards, parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Regards<br>
Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 19 Jun 2016 07:28, "parminder" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a></a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sunday 19 June 2016 11:31 AM,
Jordan Carter wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I may have missed something,
Parminder, but isn't it a plus rather than a
negative for ICANN accountability that process
errors can be appealed and the company held to
account for them?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
Jordan<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In may make ICANN accountable, but to a
system that is unaccountable to the global public, and is
only accountable to the US public (there could even be
cases where these two could be in partial conflict) - that
in sum is the jurisdiction issue. ICANN accountability
issue is different, though linked, bec it has to be
accountable, but to the right system, which itself is
accountable to the global public. Different 'layers' of
accountability are implicated here, as people in IG space
will like to say! <br>
<br>
Here the issue is, a US court has no right to
(exclusively) adjudicate the rights of the African people,
bec African people had no part in making or legitimising
the system that the US court is a part of. Dont you see
what problem we will be facing if the US court says that
fairness of process or whatever demands that .africa goes
to DCA. If you were an African, what would you feel?<br>
<br>
An ICANN under international law will be subject to only
an international judicial process, which Africa is equally
a part of, and gives legitimacy to.
<br>
<span style="color:#888888"><br>
parminder </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jordan<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 19 June 2016 at 07:26,
parminder <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sunday 19 June 2016 04:13
AM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p>The Economist | A virtual turf war: The
scramble for .africa <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21700661-lawyers-california-are-denying-africans-their-own-domain-scramble?frsc=dg%7Cd">
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21700661-lawyers-california-are-denying-africans-their-own-domain-scramble?frsc=dg%7Cd</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Not that this fact is being discovered now, but it
still is the simplest and clearest proof that US
jurisdiction over ICANN's policy processes and
decisions is absolutely untenable. Either the US
makes a special legal provision unilaterally
foregoing judicial, legislative and executive
jurisdiction over ICANN policy functions, or the
normal route of ICANN's incorporation under
international law is taken, making ICANN an
international organisation under international
law, and protected from US jurisdiction under a
host country agreement. <br>
<span style="color:#888888"><br>
parminder <br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Paul Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org"
target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community"
target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jordan Carter <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Wellington, New Zealand<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B64%2021%20442%20649"
target="_blank">+64 21 442 649</a> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jordan@jordancarter.org.nz"
target="_blank">jordan@jordancarter.org.nz</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community"
target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center" align="center">
<hr style="color:#A0A0A0" noshade="noshade" size="1"
width="100%" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">No
virus found in this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</a><br>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4604/12441 - Release
Date: 06/17/16<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>