I have a question.
How would you rate
the "power" of the individual users (via the ALAC) in the ICANN process
compared, for instance, to the "power" of business users (via the Business
Constituency)? Considering that the ICANN model is a multistakeholder model,
where different stakeholder groups participate on equal footing, comparable
stakeholder groups are supposed to have similar rights.
I believe that, also considering the different reviews (GNSO, NomCom and ALAC) ongoing, you might better be careful in what you ask for, because you might get it.
Cheers,
Roberto
> -----Original Message-----
>
From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org]
On Behalf Of
> Jacqueline Morris
> Sent: Thursday, 14 February 2008 21:35
>
To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org; ttcs@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [At-Large] Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2
>
> Fyi
> Please comment.
> Jacqueline
>
>
>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From:
Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg@web.de>
>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:20:14 +0430
> Subject:
[ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2
> To: ALAC internal
list <alac-internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>
> Dear folks,
>
> Here, the draft by the present drafting group
members:
> Annette, Beau, Wolf
>
> we stayed in the taj palace and come
over to dinner now! ;-)
>
> see you soon
>
> best greetings
>
> annette
>
>
>
> Proposed
ALAC-statement regarding JPA:
>
> As the JPA (between the US Government and ICANN) is under
> Review, ALAC wishes to underline the unique
opportunity the
> occasion offers to realize the
original goals that led to the
> formation of ICANN.
These include, inter alia,
> acknowledgement of the
international nature of ICANN, support
> of the
multi-stakeholder bottom-up approach to the management
> of ICANN, and the provision of viable and stable channels for
> the involvement of individual Internet users in the
ICANN
> policy formation process. Measures must be
implemented to
> ensure non-discriminatory
availability of ICANN/IANA services
> as well as the
opportunity for the involvement of global
>
individual users in the ICANN process.
>
> In its role as the voice of the individual Internet
users,
> ALAC firmly believes that the current
multi-stakeholder
> framework at ICANN should be
further strengthened to allow
> more effective
involvement of end-users. The process to full
>
participation of individual users through the ALAC and its
> Regional At-Large Organizations (RALOs) is being undertaken
> at this moment. There is, however, a lack of
incentives for
> the participants, especially a lack
of direct involvement at
> the decision-making levels
of ICANN. Therefore,
>
>
we believe ICANN should consider mechanisms for stronger user
> participation, such as At-Large voting rights on the GNSO
> council and the ICANN board.
>
> Alternative for the last
sentence:
>
> [we think
that ICANN should find ways to implement adequate
>
representation of individual users at the decision-making
> levels of ICANN so that a real multi-stakeholder framework is
> achieved.]
>
> In addition, we believe no government should have a
> pre-eminent role in DNS management and exercise
power over
> database changes and root-server data.
We suggest that an
> institutional form should be
found as soon as possible so
> that ICANN does not
lie under the authority of any single
> national
legislation. We also strongly advocate transparency
>
and openness in the process of making any structural change
> in the ICANN framework for the coming transition.
>
>
> We are
concerned that the successor oversight framework is
>
still not clear and ICANN needs to clarify the transitional
> arrangements with regard to accountability and transparency
> as well as to allow further definition and
evolution of the
> multi-stakeholder model of
governance under which it operates.
>
> We need to know what replaces the JPA, which refers
to "the
> global participation of all stakeholders"
and "mechanisms for
> involvement of those affected
by the ICANN policies." As the
> Internet-using
public is a key set of stakeholders affected
> by
ICANN's policies, it is critical, including for Internet
> security and stability, that the organization be accountable
> to the public and account effectively for its
input.
>
>
> Respectfully submitted,
>
>
>
> Chair
>
> At-Large Advisory Committee
>
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers
>