[EURO-Discuss] [Fwd: Re: [ALAC-Internal] Proposed ALAC-statement regarding JPA]

[Jacqueline A.Morris]

Dear All,
Please see the draft below of a proposed At Large statement on the JPA.
Time is short - the deadline is tomorrow, but as much participation as 
possible is the At Large way, so please do what you can re comments.

Jacqueline

>>  Annette Muehlberg wrote:
>>  Hi all,
>>
>> i think by replacing the last paragraph we could, wihtout dismissing other
>> positions, reach a consensus. please have a look at the last alternative
>> paragraph.
>>
>> warm 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 proactive involvement of end-users. The
>> process to full participation of individual users through the ALAC/RALO
>> (Regional At-Large Organization) mechanism 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 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 that 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.
>>
>> However, at this mid-term review phase, we do not believe the organization
>> is ready to function without a similar accountability mechanism to the JPA
>> in place.
>>
>>
>> Alternative replacing the last paragraph:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>