[NCSG-Discuss] NCSG Questions & Concerns for our Representatives on the Accountability & Transparency Review Team (ATRT2)

[Milton L Mueller]

> -----Original Message-----
> I am personally surprised the Independent Review Panel mechanisms have
> been use so rarely.  I would like to understand why.

[Milton L Mueller] It is not hard to understand. It is the cost. The XXX appeal probably cost Stuart Lawley $2 million or so. All proceedings are not inherently that expensive, but if you want to win you really do have to engage expensive international lawyers. 

The other problem is the non-binding nature of the IRP's decisions. Costs high, risk of the whole thing being meaningless. 

Of course, we don't want an expensive and time-consuming appeals process to be TOO easy. Then people would use it to challenge every policy decision they didn't like the outcome of. So there are some difficult issues there. 

> I think it is important, and though I understand that California law
> prohibits binding decisions, I think it a reasonable expectation that
> the board should adhere to their decisions.

[Milton L Mueller] California law does NOT prohibit binding decisions. That is ICANN staff propaganda. 
You might want to review the debate over that that took place in the ICM Registry case.