[Ws2-jurisdiction] Jurisdiction Questionnaire: RESPONSE REQUESTED

[parminder]

On Sunday 08 January 2017 10:40 PM, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> I find it hard to understand the below formulation.
>
> Nothing ICANN does in respect of its seat will affect the ability of a
> court for that jurisdiction to issue judicial decisions affecting ICANN.

Everything that a court can do to force ICANN's hand is based on the
seat of ICANN, unless given special immunities (which I see below that
you are against). This is apart from in any case being able to enforce
its writ "to the extent of" of ICANN's operation in that country.
>
> ICANN's (or rather IANA's)role in respect of ccTLDs is very limited.
>
> It can only act in respect of an existing ccTLD where there has been
> 'substantial misbehaviour'. This has been accepted by the ccNSO and
> GAC over 6 years of constructive working together, interpreted
> definitively in an aid to construction (the Framework of
> Interpretation), and confirmed by a resolution of the ICANN board.

OFAC application to ccTLD or any other relationship with residents of a
sanctioned country has absolutely nothing to do with what ICANN decides.
It is a matter of US state's power and prerogative.
>
> Since money doesn't change hands between ccTLD managers and IANA,
> OFAC's remit is somewhat faint.

All kinds of transactions even without money exchange get covered under
OFAC.

>
> But the same problems arise whatever jurisdiciton you pick for ICANN's
> seat UNLESS you want to give them immunity even for their own negligence.
>
> Having seen and been a victim at first hand the misbehaviour of ICANN
> v1.0, there is NO WAY that ICANN should have or deserves special
> immunities, no matter what it's location.

If you do not trust non- traditional country jurisdiction based
oversights to manage ICANN -- for instance, by community mechanisms,
enforceable through private channels -- then you would have to go for an
international law, and judicial oversight, system. You can chose one of
them -
(1) ICANN incorporated in the US, but with jurisdictional immunities, or
(2) ICANN under international law.

But the world would not accept to be under US government's legal,
legislative and executive oversight. What is being said of the Internet,
can be extended to practically all aspects of our society's working, as
we get increasingly globally intertwined. If this is the global
governance model that you got to offer to us - to come under US gov's
oversight - then, thanks, we are better off in our nationalised contexts
- for the Internet, and for everything else.

parminder
>
>
>
>
> On 08/01/17 10:24, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>
>> If based on OFAC the case before the court is to act upon a ccTLD .
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>