[CCWG-ACCT] Draft criteria for comparison of accountability mechanisms

[Mathieu Weill]

Dear Colleagues,

Apologies for first cut off email.

A discussion was raised with WP1 about how we would reach decisions when 
comparing various options for the accountability mechanisms we are 
working on.

In anticipation of our CCWG call please find below a first draft list of 
questions which should enable us to, at least, clarify the merits of the 
various options before we reach conclusions. This is of particular 
importance before our meeting in Istanbul.

You will be provided an opportunity to comment during the call tomorrow, 
but this can also be achieved via mailing list.

Best,
Mathieu
---------------------------------------
Key criteria to compare options :

1) Comparing enhancements to accountability

      a) Aspects of accountability
           - does one option provide greater transparency ?
           - does one option provide better consultation ?
           - does one option provide improved review ? e
           - does one option provide improved redress ?

      b) Qualities of accountability mechanisms
           - does one option provide better checks and balances ?
           - does one option provide better independence ?

      c) Stakeholders : does one option extend accountability to more 
relevant stakeholders ?

      d) Purpose : does one option enable accountability to more of the 
relevant accountability purposes ?

2) Effectiveness : Would one of the options be more effective ?

3) Simplicity : is one option simpler / easier / faster to set up ?
      a)   Simplicity of design - what is the level of simplicity to 
implement and to explain, internally and externally?
      b) Simplicity of operation - what is the level of attention and 
resource required from the community to make the mechanism work?