[EURO-Discuss] alac review

[Dominik Filipp]

Vittorio,

I appreciate your clear and straightforward view expressed here.

Let me elaborate a little.

You are right that 'the idea that the At Large has a role in the broader context of Internet Governance, or that the purpose of the ALAC includes ensuring the accountability and democracy of ICANN' is not written in the ICANN Bylaws. And you are also right that 'the accountability of ICANN to the general public is a fundamental issue', this time written in the ICANN Bylaws.

The fact, however, is that the fundamental issue mentioned above is from time to time very far from the reality. Just have a look at the Core Values how far is ICANN from the methodologies written there with respect to the public interests. There were issues where the public was de facto excluded from active participation although they were prominently public oriented (e.g. Verisign agreement, some other registry agreements, Domain Tasting). I am talking about real participation with real results, not working groups often doing great job, which is eventually spoiled by final voting of few.
This all makes the bylaws just a sheet of paper being waved with. And I hope you can see this is not the best way where ICANN should be directed.

As regards the At-Large community. There are voices here not satisfied with the undignified status of the body as written in the bylaws. No wonder. They feel as being already competent enough to conduct their own affaires more effectively than to delegate the affaires to unaccountable people somewhere else. And it is a natural progress of a community that is gradually getting matured capable of taking responsibility for their affaires and logically expecting more rights.

If this happened I would see no problem to change the respective bylaws. This situation is usually referred to as 'evolution'.

Dominik


-----Original Message-----
From: euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Vittorio Bertola
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:29 PM
To: Discussion for At-Large Europe
Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] alac review

Kleinwächter ha scritto:
> I fully support Dominik,
> 
> Westlake does not understand the role of At Large in the ICANN context

More precisely, Westlake has been instructed to review the effectiveness of the current structure in reaching the purpose of the ALAC as described in the ICANN Bylaws: "to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users".

The idea that the At Large has a role "in the broader context of Internet Governance", or that the purpose of the ALAC includes ensuring the accountability and democracy of ICANN, is entirely yours (Jeanette's, etc.), and while the accountability of ICANN to the general public is a fundamental issue which I too find very important, it is not what is written in the ICANN Bylaws as the purpose of the ALAC. To a certain extent, it is you and Dominik who do not understand the role of At Large in the ICANN structure :-) (seriously, I think that one of the issues is that different people have very different understandings of the purpose of the ALAC)

As I said today in the meeting, the issue about the accountability of ICANN pertains more to the discussions about the post-JPA status and structure of ICANN. Perhaps the ALAC would do more good in making better use of its representative on the President's Strategy Committee, and in advocating for a broader and more open discussion in that process.
-- 
vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
-------->  finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/  <--------

_______________________________________________
EURO-Discuss mailing list
EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org