I did not recall such GNSO action, nor is it on the agenda for today's meeting. So I asked Steve about the origin. This is his reply.
This statement was drafted yesterday morning in GNSO constituencies, not in the GNSO Council. So we¹re asking each constituency in GNSO whether they agree. So far, IPC, Registries, Registrars, and BC are all agreed to join. More are considering, and we really wanted to bring ALAC into the picture.
I certainly support the sentiment. I have not had the chance to review the details, but my first reaction is that I like it. Although I not sure that it is needed, I like the idea that it also applies to the constituent parts of ICANN as well as the Board (although perhaps the Board should be the first arbiter). The ability to use this path in the course of Board INACTION may also be merited. Alan At 25/06/2014 02:42 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
Dear ALAC members,
please be so kind to find the email below from Steve DelBianco. Comments? Suggestions?
Kindest regards,
Olivier
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: ALAC join our Joint Statement? Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 20:00:58 +0000 From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr@gmail.com>
Please Think about joining all of GNSO on this statement - to be delivered Thursday to the board
Let me know soon as you can! -Steve
The entire GNSO join together today calling for the Board to support community creation of an independent accountability mechanism that provides meaningful review and adequate redress for those harmed by ICANN action or inaction in contravention of an agreed upon compact with the community. This deserves the Board's serious consideration - not only does it reflect an unprecedented level of consensus across the entire ICANN community, it is a necessary and integral element of the IANA transition.
True accountability does not mean ICANN is only accountable to itself, or to some vague definition of "the world," nor does it mean that governments should have the ultimate say over community policy subject to the rule of law. Rather, the Board's decisions must be open to challenge and the Board cannot be in a position of reviewing and certifying its own decisions. We need an independent accountability structure that holds the ICANN Board, Staff, and various stakeholder groups accountable under ICANN's governing documents, serves as an ultimate review of Board/Staff decisions, and through the creation of precedent, creates prospective guidance for the board, the staff, and the entire community.
As part of the IANA transition, the multi-stakeholder community has the opportunity and responsibility to propose meaningful accountability structures that go beyond just the IANA-specific accountability issues. We are committed to coming together and developing recommendations for creation of these mechanisms. We ask the ICANN Board and Staff to fulfill their obligations and support this community driven, multi-stakeholder initiative.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)