Enhancing ICANN Accountability Update

Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) ICANN54 Update 17 October 2015

The Two-Track Parallel Process Since the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced their intent to transition stewardship of the IANA functions, the ICANN community has been working in a two-track parallel process. The ICG has finalized its Interim Draft IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal, and the CCWG-Accountability has finalized its 2nd Draft Proposal for Work Stream 1. NTIA Announcement & Criteria CCWG -Accountability ICANN CCWG Proposal Enhancing ICANN Accountability Linkage CWG Stewardship ICANN BOARD ICG NTIA CRISP ICG IANA Stewardship Transition IANAPLA N Proposal 2 Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) Accountability 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment

CCWG-Accountability Status 2nd Public Comment analysis completed Few, but important areas of concern Reallocation/concentration of power Membership rights/risk of capture Lot of support in many areas, where only refinements Lot of progress 3 Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) Accountability 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment

Building Blocks Supported with Some Refinements The CCWG-Accountability has identified enhancements required to those building blocks that would form the accountability mechanisms required to improve ICANN s accountability. BUDGET STRATEGY/OPS PLAN BYLAWS 1 2 3 4 5 REVIEW / REJECT REMOVE / RECALL AC SO AC SO AC SO AC ICANN Board has the ultimate authority to approve or reject policy recommendations, developed by the SOs. ACs formally advise the ICANN Board on particular issues or policy areas (i.e. the Executive). STRUCTURAL REVIEW As Community accountability The Empowered Community refers to the powers that allow the community SOs & ACs to take action should ICANN breach the principles (i.e. the People). Fundamental Bylaws 7+ MEMBER STANDING PANEL NEW IRP NEW BYLAWS Existing + New The Principles guarantee the core mission, commitments and values of ICANN through its Bylaws (i.e. the Constitution). mechanisms+ AoC Independent Appeals Mechanisms confers the power to review and provide redress, as needed (i.e. the Judiciary). Reviews 4 Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) Accountability 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment

Key Features Avoid capture Avoid concentration/reallocation of power Be inclusive Make it efficient 5 Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) Accountability 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment

Engagement / Escalation / Enforcement 6 Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) Accountability 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment

Influence in the Community Mechanism The CCWG-Accountability considered the decision weights of the various parts of the community. The table on the right sets out the voting distribution proposed by the CCWG-Accountability. # of Votes SO or AC Address Supporting Organization (ASO) 5 The SOs/ACs that participate in voting in the Sole Member would do so according to a set of rules described in the ICANN Bylaws that would be created specifically for this purpose. Each SO/AC would be responsible for defining their processes for voting under these rules. The chair of each SO/AC would be responsible for communicating the votes or decisions of the SO/AC to the ICANN Board. This pass-through of cumulative votes and decisions would become the act of the Sole Member. No Voting Generic Names Supporting Organization (gNSO) 5 Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) 5 Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) BOARD 5 Participating SOs and ACs would not meet as the Member At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) 5 Community Mechanism As Sole Member AC SO AC SO AC SO AC Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) 2 Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) No representatives of participating SOs and ACs would cast votes. 2 Note: GAC, SSAC and RSSAC have not yet decided whether to participate. 7

Community Decision Making No voting All parts of the Community are part of the decision making No legal incorporation / personhood needed We are moving to consensus-based decision making 8 Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) Accountability 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment

Community Mechanism Based on all existing SOs/ACs who participate jointly, not a super Board or new body Consensus decision making prevents captures and concentration of power Current If the community disagrees with a Board decision or action, they have no recourse to challenge it. Proposed If the community disagrees with a Board decision or action, they can challenge it exercising their powers through the CMSM. BOARD BOARD Board Decision or Action Board Decision or Action Recourse! Make Policies (SOs) Make Policies (SOs) No recourse 3 4 2 5 1 Representation on the Board Representation on the Board Powers Community Mechanism Advise (ACs) Advise (ACs) Community disagrees? Community disagrees? 9 AC SO AC SO AC SO AC AC SO AC SO AC SO AC THE COMMUNITY THE EMPOWERED COMMUNITY 9

Takeaway messages CCWG-Accountability will ensure: The community as a whole will be the decision maker (for community empowerment) No concentration of power with a few interest groups All components of the Community can join regardless of their status Maximum inclusiveness Least risk of capture 10