[MemberPubPol] Re: [chapter-delegates] FYI - in the coming discussion of the WGIG questionnaire

[avri doria]

On 7 jun 2005, at 01.32, Fred Baker wrote:

> If one assumes that DoC does not renew its contract with ICANN but 
> rather cedes control to ICANN entirely, would his arguments about 
> ICANN then persuade you that ICANN is a global organization that 
> happens to be incorporated in California, much like ITU is a global 
> organization that happens to have a physical instantiation in Geneva? 
> If not, why not? Is this simply anti-US sentiment on your part, or is 
> it based on something more solid?


I made the same argument you made Fred (go figure) while talking to 
professionals who knew about treaty organizations and host country 
agreements.  And though they gave me a much more erudite response then 
I am able to give, they essentially  indicated that there is an 
essential difference between an organization that has a host agreement 
with a country and an organization that is incorporated under US  (or 
any other country's) law.

When an organization like the Red Cross is hosted by Switzerland, and 
there are many other examples, they make agreements to abide with local 
laws, such as sanitation and labor laws, but are not subject to any 
national legislation, instead being governed by the agreement or treaty 
made with the host government.

On the other hand, a US corporation, whether for profit or non-profit 
is subject to all US laws, including laws that specify which other 
countries they can do business with and conditions they must follow in 
so doing.  Saying this is not anti-US rhetoric, but US law as i 
understand it.  Now, it may be anti-US bias to assume that the US would 
use it law making capability to force ICANN to punish an evil doer, but 
it is not anti-US bias to say that they would be within legal rights in 
doing so if they wished.

So, to my mind, ICANN cannot become a full fledged international 
organization without shifting from its current existence as a US corp, 
to becoming an organization established with a host country agreement - 
even if that country were the US (the UN and others have host country 
agreements of the type discussed with the US).

a.