[chapter-delegates] WGIG summary of replies to the questionnaire

[Patrick Vande Walle]

[I posted this message to memberpubpol at elists.isoc.org and someone
suggested I should repost it here]

Dear all,

I am trying to launch a debate here regarding the WGIG process. The goal is
to have a common position of the ISOC chapters and to escalate it to ISOC
and WGIG. My first thoughts after reading the WGIG summary:

The first question was if there a need for an additional body. Actually,
there might be a need for two bodies, one new and a reformed existing
one. Internet Governance is a vast domain, ranging from IP address
allocation issues to interconnection tariffs, freedom of expression,
intellectual property issues, cybercrime... Only a small part of the
above is currently managed by ICANN.

One of these bodies should address the oversight function by taking over
the role of the DoC in relation with ICANN, and especially the control
on the root zone. The majority of the TLDs in the root zone file are
*country* codes, thus this is a matter of national sovereignty, which
cannot be delegated neither to specific government nor to the private
sector, the latter lacking any legitimacy under international law.

My opinion is that a reformed GAC (let's call it GOC, with an “o” for
oversight) could address that part. Root server operations being 90%
technical, the workload on the GOC would be rather limited. But since it
would be multilateral, it would de facto be less challengeable.

I would like to stress the fact that, under such a model, ICANN would be
left largely untouched, which should reassure the many within ISOC who
preach the “if it ain't broken don't fix it” attitude. Having cut its
link with the DoC would actually give extra legitimacy to the ICANN
process, as it will not appear to be flawed from the start.

The other body would address the other parts of IG in terms of
discussion, coordination and facilitation. This body should be
lightweight and rely on others existing institutions or fora to take the
lead when discussing specific issues (WIPO on IP issues, IETF on
standards issues, etc).

The funding of this group should be balanced between the public and the
private sector. It needs to work for the common good and should be in a
financial position that prevents it to be captured by one or another
interest group.

Regs,

Patrick Vande Walle