[Chapter-delegates] Internet Society Appointments to the NTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group

[Miller, Stephen H (Basrah)]

+1.  A little-discussed fact is that ICANN essentially selects its own Board (and so its own oversight) through NomCom and related procedures.  A general principle of effective oversight, or auditing, or corporate governance-whatever kind of oversight-is structural independence from the entity being overseen.   In the case of IANA, whatever the political or optical issues with NTIA, that separation was clear.  Going into uncharted waters with this process, it may be natural for ICANN to want to direct it and subsume it into its own organization and structure.  But well-defined outside oversight is probably the best and most efficient guarantor of accountability.  I think Evan has put his finger on the biggest danger in this process, imho.

-SHM

From: Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 6:47 PM
To: Alejandro Pisanty
Cc: Chapter Delegates; Demi Getschko
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet Society Appointments to the NTIA/IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group

On 3 July 2014 05:46, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty at gmail.com<mailto:apisanty at gmail.com>> wrote:

ISOC is the only member of the Coordination Group that is not simultaneously a directly interested party, a "client" of IANA or a structural participant in ICANN.


FWIW, I would also generally add to that set of characteristics, the people currently being considered to fill the spots on the CG by ICANN At-Large. While coming from a "structural participant in ICANN", the At-Large delegates are also non-conflicted, and seek to protect the interests of those who are neither sellers nor buyers of domains. (Indeed, such perspective of At-Large is mandated in the ICANN bylaws.)  It is no coincidence that so many ISOC chapters are also At-Large Structures.

The ALAC and ISOC delegates have highly common interest at the CG, and the potential to be an effective coalition. No doubt there will be other, self-interested coalitions with which they will need to contend.

I have already been hearing from some corners of ICANN a sentiment that oversight of IANA should "naturally" fall to those with whom ICANN has contractual relations. If carried through to its logical conclusion this perspective would, in effect, put the regulated in change of the regulator; it needs to be resisted.

Indeed, a trusted insider has suggested to me that the reference by some within ICANN to the current situation as "IANA transition" (as opposed to the more accurate "IANA stewardship transition") is deliberate, and an attempt to shift (or at least blur) the focus.

This will indeed be an interesting environment.

- Evan


This email is UNCLASSIFIED.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20140703/d77489ad/attachment.htm>