[Igo-ingo-curative-rights-irt] FW: IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT

April 14, 2026

      All,

Just sent the email below to Council and will update them on where things stand on Thursday’s meeting. Let me know if you have questions.

Damon

J. Damon Ashcraft
, P.C.

From: Ashcraft, Damon
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 9:25 AM
To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org>
Cc: Peter Eakin <peter.eakin@icann.org>
Subject: IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT

Dear Fellow Councilors,

I’m writing in my role as Council Liaison to provide a brief update on a disagreement that has emerged within the IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT following the January Council meeting and Resolution<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions/2020-current>. To recap the context, the EPDP<https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/generic-names-supporting-organization-cou...> recommendations on Specific Curative Rights Protections for International Government Organizations (IGOs) were designed to resolve a long-standing barrier to IGO use of the UDRP or URS because of their inability to submit to court jurisdiction without compromising their legal immunities. The agreed solution was to provide registrants with an alternative to court proceedings: a new, binding specialized arbitration mechanism that registrants may use when a UDRP or URS proceeding is filed by an IGO. In January, the Council was asked to clarify the timing of this mechanism, and whether the EPDP Recommendations should be read as limiting its availability until after a UDRP or URS proceeding has been concluded. As you will remember, the Council passed a resolution affirming that the intent of the recommendations was to allow respondents in an IGO-related proceeding to voluntarily leverage arbitration or alternative dispute resolution methods at any time once a proceeding has commenced - even prior to a final UDRP or URS decision.

However, since the passing of the Resolution, IGO representatives within the IRT have voiced strong objections. They contend that allowing access to the new specialized arbitration mechanism before a UDRP or URS determination oversteps the original policy scope and should not be permitted. Neither do they regard the Council Resolution as addressing this scenario. Instead, IGO representatives read the resolution as confirming only that arbitration proceedings are possible at any time, which should remain separate and unregulated within the existing UDRP/URS framework as is the case at present. However, other members of the IRT believe this is a misreading of the intent of the EPDP and Resolution that could ultimately disadvantage respondents in these disputes.

ICANN staff are actively supporting the IRT to find a way forward and are currently exploring various implementation options to resolve this issue. We aren’t at a point where a formal request for Council intervention is needed, but I wanted to put this on your radar now because of the significance of this implementation for the wider IGO workstream and acronym release. I will provide a further update on Thursday during AOB.

Thanks, Damon

J. Damon Ashcraft
, P.C.