[CWG-RFP3] Is there is a more suitable legal jurisdiction for anIANA subsidiary?

[Dwi Elfrida Martina]

Hi,

my name is Dwi Elfrida, I am from Indonesia. in respond to optioned 2 from
Robert, and thanks to bring the jurisdiction issue up, in my opinion to tie
up IANA legal status to ICANN's legal status might a faster way to reach
IANA's legislation. But, it wouldn't be solution for many parties who
questioned IANA's independency from the US government authority, as I know,
for some parties the good news (main spirit)  of  transition of IANA
stewardship is to internationalized IANA, means to dismiss the image of
single authority of the US government over IANA. Meanwhile, some parties
are still debated the ICANN's legislation that cannot be counted as
International law, as all cases of TLD (mostly gTLD) will be processed in
the US by using the US law. Therefore, the government of France (at ICANN
meeting in London) was still calling the issue of making ICANN as
International organization legalized by International law. And this idea
seems like supported by some governments in Europe, and other part of this
world. Indeed, placing IANA's functions and office from the US to other
part of this world, is not the solution as well, because it is not the
matter or territory, but the matter of legislation system, which law that
suitable enough to validate IANA? do we agree to use the US legislation
system like has been used by the ICANN, or do we agree to use International
law, then how will we make it happen? Our choice on IANA's legislation
system will determine the law enforcement of IANA's policies in the future.

Regards,

Dwi

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
wrote:

>  [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> Greg Shatan (
> gregshatanipc at gmail.com) is not on your Guest List
> <https://www.boxbe.com/approved-list?tc_serial=19182912144&tc_rand=1184408227&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_MWTP&utm_content=001&token=qXEye5ECFs8sowPv0%2F4O8pOgVuL%2FBmLxktanSEOAIoHm3oce3A%2BGf6umfpPHJkCc&key=hXVOG4roryQLXAw%2BAJXI90w8csVOeh5xYEclQYt0Qbk%3D>
> | Approve sender
> <https://www.boxbe.com/anno?tc_serial=19182912144&tc_rand=1184408227&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_MWTP&utm_content=001&token=qXEye5ECFs8sowPv0%2F4O8pOgVuL%2FBmLxktanSEOAIoHm3oce3A%2BGf6umfpPHJkCc&key=hXVOG4roryQLXAw%2BAJXI90w8csVOeh5xYEclQYt0Qbk%3D>
> | Approve domain
> <https://www.boxbe.com/anno?tc_serial=19182912144&tc_rand=1184408227&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_MWTP&utm_content=001&dom&token=qXEye5ECFs8sowPv0%2F4O8pOgVuL%2FBmLxktanSEOAIoHm3oce3A%2BGf6umfpPHJkCc&key=hXVOG4roryQLXAw%2BAJXI90w8csVOeh5xYEclQYt0Qbk%3D>
>
> All:
>
> Here is Robert's second question (which I think also applies to the
> concept of a fully independent IANA):
>
>
>
> *For  option #2.- Is there is a  jurisdiction that ICANN has (or can
> obtain) legal status might be more suitable to use to create IANA as a
> subsidiary. Such an option might allow for the link to be a subsidiary of
> ICANN, but sever the legal link to the US. A negative, of course, would be
> moving the function and existing staff to a new part of the world.*
>
> Comments and discussion?
>
> Greg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
> Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3
>
>


-- 
Dwi Elfrida MS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-rfp3/attachments/20141105/79e04643/attachment.html>