[ncsg-policy] speaking of accountability...

[Robin Gross]

I agree with Milton's analysis and suggestion that those concerned  
about ICANN accountability should comment on this issue and urge  
ICANN to accept the decision of the Independent Review Panel.  I plan  
to.

ICANN has a bad habit of calling for a "do-over" (Yet Another  
Process, or YAP) when decisions are taken that ICANN doesn't really  
want to implement.  Rather than re-create YAP to reach a different  
result, one desired by the "more-equal members of the community",  
ICANN should follow the existing process and uphold its obligations  
to those who try to play by its rules.

The Independent Review Panel decision is very clear in its finding  
that ICANN has to follow rules like everyone else, and it failed to  
in this instance, and that the proper remedy is for the Board to  
reverse its earlier decision and mishandling of the .XXX domain.   
This would demonstrate ICANN is capable of growth and accountability  
by accepting some measure of independent over-sight on its previously  
mistaken decisions.

Thanks,
Robin


On Mar 28, 2010, at 9:46 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

>
> In a bad development, ICANN’s lawyers are attempting to brush aside  
> its only real external accountability mechanism, the Independent  
> Review Process (IRP). As you know, ICANN lost its IRP challenge on  
> the .xxx top level domain.
>
> Instead of accepting this decision and conforming to it, ICANN is  
> asking for public comment on whether it should accept the decision  
> (simple answer: YES); it is also suggesting that the applicant  
> would have to go through an entirely new “review process” to get  
> the domain that was unfairly denied it five years ago. The proposed  
> process for the “review” looks like it was designed by a crazy man  
> – there is a clear attempt here to deny justice through perpetual  
> process cycling.
>
> The comment period on this travesty is now open: http:// 
> www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-26mar10-en.htm
> I urge all NCSC members to comment along the following lines:
>
> ·         ICANN must respect the decision of the IRP panel.
> ·         ICANN has no justification for starting a de novo review  
> process when its review panel has already decided that it acted in  
> an unfair and discriminatory manner. To do so is to prolong the  
> injustice.
> ·         ICANN has no business asking the GAC – or any other  
> Advisory Committee – for political advice, it simply needs to  
> conform to the IRP decision
>
> Please don’t allow ICANN to pretend that the public doesn’t want it  
> to be accountable. Comment on this proposal!
>
> --MM




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100329/fd723f27/attachment.html>