Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this content. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Version History

Version 1 Next »

Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1)

Open Date 4 May 2015 23:59 UTC

Close Date 3 Jun 2015 23:59 UTC

 Staff Report Due 29 Jun 2015 23:59 UTC


See https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-2015-05-04-en for details. 

Brief Overview

Important Information (Update 1 June 2015)

Three questions from the CCWG-Accountability proposal were inadvertently omitted from the questions on this page.  They are in the proposal document, but not copied over to the public comment input below.

Please consider the following three questions in your responses to the CCWG-Accountability public comment:

  1. The CCWG-Accountability welcomes feedback on whether there is a need, as part of Work Stream 1 (pre-Transition), to provide for any other means for other parts of theICANN system to be able to propose new Fundamental Bylaws or changes to existing ones.  In particular, the CCWG-Accountability welcomes feedback on whether the Mission should be subject to even higher thresholds of Board or community assent.
    (paragraph 126 of the CCWG-Accountability proposal)
  2. Do you agree that the introduction of a community mechanism to empower the community over certain Board decisions would enhance ICANN's accountability?
    (paragraph 189 of the CCWG-Accountability proposal)
  3. What guidance, if any, would you provide to the CCWG-Accountability regarding the proposed options? Please provide the underlying rationale in terms of required accountability features or protection against certain contingencies.
    (paragraph 190 of the CCWG-Accountability proposal)

The CCWG-Accountability requests community feedback on the proposed enhancements toICANN's accountability framework it has identified as essential to happen or be committed to before the IANA Stewardship Transition takes place (Work Stream 1). Your input will help the CCWG-Accountability to improve its proposal and carry on with next steps, including Chartering Organizations' endorsement of the CCWG-Accountability output before it is submitted to theICANN Board. This comment period is an opportunity for you to make your voice heard and to shape the outcome of the CCWG-Accountability work.

In order to have time to analyze and process community feedback before ICANN53 (21-25 June), and considering the key dependencies Work Stream 1 has with the work related to theIANA Stewardship Transition, the CCWG-Accountability determined that the maximum time that could be allotted to this comment period is 30 days. The CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 1 proposals are not final: a second Public Comment period is planned for July, and will be a full 40-day period. Because this (first) Public Comment period is less than the required 40-day minimum, it has been approved by two ICANN Global Leaders.

Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose

The following questions provide a framework to assist with preparing and providing feedback to the CCWG-Accountability. Using this framework in helping respond to the Public Comment proceeding will facilitate the CCWG-Accountability's processing of input received.

Public Comment Input Framework

Do you believe the set of Work Stream 1 proposals in this interim report, if implemented or committed to, would provide sufficient enhancements to ICANN's accountability to proceed with the IANA Stewardship transition? If not, please clarify what amendments would be needed to the set of recommendation.

Do you have any general feedback or suggestion on the interim Work Stream 1 proposals?

Revised Mission, Commitments & Core Values

  1. Do you agree that these recommended changes to ICANN's Mission, Commitments and Core Values would enhance ICANN's accountability?
  2. Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would amend these requirements.

Fundamental Bylaws

Additional question:

  • The CCWG-Accountability welcomes feedback on whether there is a need, as part of Work Stream 1 (pre-Transition), to provide for any other means for other parts of the ICANNsystem to be able to propose new Fundamental Bylaws or changes to existing ones.  In particular, the CCWG-Accountability welcomes feedback on whether the Mission should be subject to even higher thresholds of Board or community assent. 
  1. Do you agree that the introduction of Fundamental Bylaws would enhance ICANN's accountability?
  2. Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation, including the list of which Bylaws should become Fundamental Bylaws? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Independent Review Panel Enhancement

  1. Do you agree that the proposed improvements to the IRP would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Reconsideration Process Enhancement

  1. Do you agree that the proposed improvements to the reconsideration process would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements. Are the timeframes and deadlines proposed herein sufficient to meet the community's needs? Is the scope of permissible requests broad / narrow enough to meet the community's needs?

Mechanism to empower the Community

Additional questions:

  • Do you agree that the introduction of a community mechanism to empower the community over certain Board decisions would enhance ICANN's accountability?
  • What guidance, if any, would you provide to the CCWG-Accountability regarding the proposed options? Please provide the underlying rationale in terms of required accountability features or protection against certain contingencies.
  1. What guidance, if any, would you provide to the CCWG-Accountability regarding the proposed options related to the relative influence of the various groups in the community mechanism? Please provide the underlying rationale in terms of required accountability features or protection against certain contingencies.

Power: reconsider/reject budget or strategy/operating plans

  1. Do you agree that the power for the community to reject a budget or strategic plan would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Power: reconsider/reject changes to ICANN "standard" Bylaws

  1. Do you agree that the power for the community to reject a proposed Bylaw change would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Power: approve changes to "Fundamental" Bylaws

  1. Do you agree that the power for the community to approve any fundamental Bylaw change would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Power: Recalling individual ICANN Directors

  1. Do you agree that the power for the community to remove individual Board Directors would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Power: Recalling the entire ICANN Board

  1. Do you agree that the power for the community to recall the entire Board would enhanceICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Incorporating the Affirmation of Commitments into the ICANN Bylaws

  1. Do you agree that the incorporation into ICANN's Bylaws of the Affirmation of Commitments principles would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.
  2. Do you agree that the incorporation into ICANN's Bylaws of the Affirmation of Commitments reviews would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Bylaws changes suggested by Stress Tests

  1. Do you agree that the incorporation into ICANN's Bylaws of the above changes, as suggested by stress tests, would enhance ICANN's accountability? Do you agree with the list of requirements for this recommendation? If not, please detail how you would recommend amending these requirements.

Items for Consideration in Work Stream 2

The CCWG-Accountability seeks input from the community regarding its proposed work plan for the CCWG-Accountability Accountability Work Stream 2? If need be, please clarify what amendments would be needed.

Section II: Background

On 14 March 2014 the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)announced its intent to transition its stewardship of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions and related root zone management to the global multistakeholder community.NTIA asked ICANN to convene a multistakeholder process to develop a proposal for the transition. The IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) was formed in July 2014 to assemble and deliver through the ICANN Board to NTIA a transition proposal consistent with the key principles outlined in the NTIA announcement.

As initial discussions of the IANA Stewardship Transition were taking place, the ICANNcommunity raised the broader topic of the impact of the transition on ICANN's current accountability mechanisms. From this dialogue, the Enhancing ICANN Accountability process was developed to provide assurance that ICANN remains accountable in the absence of its historical contractual relationship with the U.S. Government, which has been perceived as a backstop with regard to ICANN's organization-wide accountability since 1998. Following public comment periods and discussions on accountability, a final Revised Enhancing ICANNAccountability: Process and Next Steps was published in October 2014. It includes considering how ICANN's broader accountability mechanisms should be strengthened in light of the transition, including a review of existing accountability mechanisms such as those within theICANN Bylaws and the Affirmation of Commitments.

A Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) was convened, designed and approved by five ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees. The CCWG-Accountability was chartered to deliver proposals that would enhanceICANN's accountability towards all stakeholders.

As indicated in the CCWG-Accountability Charter, the CCWG-Accountability has divided its work into two Work Streams:

  • Work Stream 1: focuses on mechanisms enhancing ICANN accountability that must be in place or committed to within the time frame of the IANA Stewardship Transition;
  • Work Stream 2: focuses on addressing accountability topics for which a timeline for developing solutions and full implementation may extend beyond the IANA Stewardship Transition.

Section III: Relevant Resources

The CCWG-Accountability Draft Report is the Document on which the CCWG-Accountability seeks your input and feedback. For ease of reading in this Public Comment period, the Draft Report is available in two document styles:

As a note for all comments submitted via the Public Comment proceeding: once a comment is submitted, please be on the lookout for a confirmation email (to confirm that the submission is posted to the proceeding). This is an automatically generated email to prevent spam. You must confirm your submission in order for it to appear in the proceeding archive.

In addition, along with the CCWG-Accountability Draft Report, the group has developed a set of visuals and graphics to accompany its work, available here:https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-proposal-graphic-04may15-en.pdf [PDF, 10.8 MB]. The graphics accompanying this document support the main recommendations of the CCWG-Accountability proposal, summarizing the community mechanism, the five main community powers and the new Independent Review Process. The concepts presented in the graphics do not represent consensus of the CCWG-Accountability, but are presented to facilitate understanding of the report. Reviewing the whole report and the sections where the topics of the graphics are presented in detail is encouraged.

To view CCWG-Accountability draft documents, mailing-list exchanges, meeting archives etc., please refer to the CCWG-Accountability Work Space. See CCWG-Accountability Charter for more information on the CCWG-Accountability mandate.

Section IV: Additional Information

The CCWG-Accountability invites you to join them for a webinar to provide you with an overview of their work and answer any questions you may have. These webinars will be identical and held at different times to facilitate participation across time zones:

  • 11 May from 11:00 – 12:30 UTC (time zone converter here)
  • 11 May from 19:00 – 20:30 UTC (time zone converter here)

For further details, please see: here.

For more information on the IANA Stewardship Transition, please go to:

Section V: Reports

Staff Contact

CCWG-Accountability Staff
acct-staff@icann.org
  • No labels