[WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] oversight stmt

[Milton Mueller]

Avri and all:
Below, I edit Avri's text in line with my suggestions: ADDITIONS IN
CAPS, [deletions in brackets]
Some of these changes are corrections of typos and needed for
clarification. Others are substantive. 
I will send a separate message explaining the changes. 

==========================================
Political Oversight

62b: We recognize that the time has come for a change in the political
oversight of the logical Internet infrastructure. We do not recommend
the creation of a new INTER-GOVERNMENTAL oversight organization for 
domain names and IP addresses. However, we do recommend the 
following changes with regard to ICANN be implemented in a reasonable 
time frame:

1. The US Government recommits to handing over its pre-eminent role of
stewardship in relation to ICANN AND THE DNS ROOT.

2. ICANN must ensure full and equal multi-stakeholder participation on
its Board and throughout its organizational structure by the community
of Internet users, civil society, the technical community, private
sector and governments.

3. ICANN must ensure that it establishes clear, transparent rules and
procedures commensurate with international norms and principles for
fair
administrative decision-making to provide for predictable policy  
outcomes.

4. THERE SHOULD BE a process for extraordinary appeal of ICANN'S 
decisions in the form of an independent multi-stakeholder review
commission INVOKED on a case-by-case basis. Just to be clear, we
are not calling for an INTERGOVERNMENTAL oversight structure, and 
we don't see an independent review process as a path towards that 
direction.

5. ICANN will negotiate an appropriate host country agreement to
replace its California Incorporation, BEING SURE TO RETAIN THOSE
ASPECTS OF ITS CALIFORNIA INCORPORATION THAT ENHANCE 
ITS ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE GLOBAL INTERNET-USING PUBLIC

6. ICANN's decisions, and any host country agreement must be 
required to comply with public policy requirements negotiated through 

international treaties, e.g in regard to human rights treaties, 
privacy 
rights, trade rules, and cybercrime treaties.  Government, INDIVIDUALS

and international organizations, including NGOs, would have the right
and 
repsonsibility of bringing violations of these requirements to the
attention 
of ICANN and if satisfactory resolution cannot be reached using ICANN 
internal processes, SHOULD have the right to invoke A BINDING appealS 
process.

7. Once all the conditions listed above are met, the US Government
SHOULD transfer the IANA function to ICANN.

[8. It is understood that achieving these conditions will rely on
negotiations 
between ICANN and the US Government.  It is expected that the 
International multistakeholder community will take part in the process

THROUGH participation in ICANN process.  It is also expected
THAT the multistakeholder community will observe and comment on 
the progress made in this process through the Forum.]