Click here to download the ALAC Statement on the Geographic Regions Review in PDF format
Comment Period | Important Information Links |
Open Date: | 30 September 2011 |
Close Date: | 19 December 2011 |
Time (UTC): | 23:59 |
Originating Organization: | Community-Wide Geographic Regions Review Working Group |
Purpose: | For the past two years a community-wide working group chartered by the ICANN Board has been working to (1) confirm the history, underlying principles and goals of the current geographic regions framework, (2) analyze how those goals and principles have been applied by the Board, Staff and community and (3) consulted with the community on how those principles and goals can be best maintained in the future. |
Current Status: | The Working Group has reached a consensus on its recommendations, but given the extensive consultative nature of this effort and mindful of the potential implications even small changes to the framework could have on the wider community, the WG decided to make this draft document available to the community for review and comment before the WG formally publishes its Final Report. |
Next Steps: | The Working Group will closely review all comments submitted in this proceeding and will determine whether to modify the recommendations in the Final Report. The Working expects to formally publish its Final Report early next year. At that time the various ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees will be asked to formally comment on the recommendations in the Final Report. |
Staff Contact: | Robert Hoggarth |
Email: |
...
- It does not satisfy the request for which the review was initiated;
- It removes countries from their original regions to which they belong, to a different region, far from their lands, with very different language and culture, and a far different level of Internet penetration (Example: Yemen from Asia to Europe).
- The document makes use of the term “mother countries”, a term that can be seen as offensive by some countries and appear to support colonialist ideals.
- By proposing a new geographical region framework along specific lines, in this case, moving to the RIR model, ICANN would be taking full responsibility over Geographical Region Divide. This would open ICANN to taking the responsibility of deciding matters of sovereignty, international law & diplomacy, including taking sides in unresolved conflicts such as the one between Argentina and the United Kingdom about the Islas Malvinas “Falkland Islands” (See Appendix A)
The draft final report says asserts that the current framework has created a large number of anomalies without detailing or even mentioning them. We believe that the proposed framework would create more problems at the representation level, as well as at the political level and will take responsibility for these anomalies. It will not fulfill the main requirement of diversity for which the geographic regions were created in ICANN.
...
While relations between Argentina and the UK were restored in 1989, the islands' sovereignty remains aside as a mutual understanding. As a result, comments received from the LACRALO region included the following:aside as a mutual understanding.
For the sake of example, and making no judgment as to its pertinence or accuracy, we include an example of a comment, transcribed verbatim, received from a contributor living in the region covered by LACRALO. The level of diplomatic detail is such that other members from the region oppose this, and we hope this illustrates the complexity of a situation which ICANN should not pertain to have an answer to.
Item 50 . “the request should be initiated or supported by the local government of the relevant country or territory.”
...