No subject
Fri Aug 14 23:55:37 BST 2009
21 August 2009
Myth 1
"Civil Society won't participate in ICANN under NCUC's charter =
proposal."
False. ICANN staffers and others claim that civil society is =
discouraged from engaging at ICANN because NCUC's charter proposal does =
not guarantee GNSO Council seats to constituencies. The facts could not =
be further from the truth. NCUC's membership includes 143 noncommercial =
organizations and individuals. Since 2008 NCUC's membership has =
increased by more 215% - largely in direct response to civil society's =
support for the NCUC charter. Not a single noncommercial organization =
commented in the public comment forum that hard-wiring council seats to =
constituencies will induce their participation in ICANN. None of the =
noncommercial organizations that commented on the NCSG Charter said they =
would participate to ICANN only if NCSG's Charter secured the =
constituencies a guaranteed seat on the GNSO.
Myth 2
"More civil society groups will get involved if the Board intervenes."
A complete illusion. Board imposition of its own charter and its =
refusal to listen to civil society groups will be interpreted as =
rejection of the many groups that commented and as discrimination =
against civil society participation. ICANN's reputation among =
noncommercial groups will be irreparably damaged unless this action is =
reversed or a compromise is found. Even if we were to accept these =
actions and try to work with them, the total impact of the staff/SIC =
NCSG charter will be to handicap noncommercial groups and make them less =
likely to participate. The appointment of representatives by the Board =
disenfranchises noncommercial groups and individuals. The =
constituency-based SIC structure requires too much organizational =
overhead for most noncommercial organizations to sustain; it also pits =
groups against each other in political competition for votes and =
members. Most noncommercial organizations will not enter the ICANN GNSO =
under those conditions.
Myth 3
The outpouring of civil society opposition can be dismissed as the =
product of a 'letter writing campaign.'=20
An outrageous claim. Overwhelming civil society opposition to the SIC =
charter emerged not once, but twice. In addition, there is the massive =
growth in NCUC membership stimulated by the broader community's =
opposition to the staff and Board actions. Attempts to minimize the =
degree to which civil society has been undermined by these developments =
are simply not going to work, and reveal a shocking degree of insularity =
and arrogance. ICANN is required to have public comment periods because =
it is supposed to listen to and be responsive to public opinion. Public =
opinion results from networks of communication and public dialogue on =
controversial issues, including organized calls to action. No policy or =
bylaw gives ICANN staff the authority to decide that it can discount or =
ignore nearly all of the groups who have taken an interest in the GNSO =
reforms, simply because they have taken a position critical of the =
staff's. ICANN's attempt to discount critical comments by labeling them =
a "letter writing campaign" undermines future participation and =
confidence in ICANN public processes.
Myth 4
"Civil society is divided on the NCSG charter issue."
Wrong. There has never been such an overwhelmingly lopsided public =
comment period in ICANN's history. While ICANN's staff is telling the =
Board that civil society is divided, the clear, documented consensus =
among civil society groups has been against the ICANN drafted NCSG =
charter and in favor of the NCUC one. Board members who rely only on =
staff-provided information may believe civil society is divided, but =
Board members who have actually read the public comments can see the =
solidarity of civil society against what ICANN is trying to impose on =
them.
Myth 5
"Existing civil society groups are not representative or diverse =
enough."
Untrue by any reasonable standard. The current civil society grouping, =
the Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC), now has 143 members =
including 73 noncommercial organizations and 70 individuals in 48 =
countries. This is an increase of more than 215% since the parity =
principle was established.[1] Noncommercial participation in ICANN is =
now more diverse than any other constituency, so it is completely unfair =
to level this charge at NCUC without applying it to others. Even back =
in 2006, an independent report by the London School of Economics showed =
that NCUC was the most diverse geographically, had the largest number of =
different people serving on the GNSO Council over time, and the highest =
turn-over in council representatives of any of the 6 constituencies. In =
contrast, the commercial users' constituency has recycled the same 5 =
people on the Council for a decade and upon the GNSO "reform", the first =
3 of 6 GNSO Councilors from the Commercial Stakeholder Group will =
represent the United States.
Myth 6
"ALAC prefers the ICANN staff drafted charter over the civil society =
drafted charter."
False. One ALAC leader said that she prefers the staff drafted charter. =
ICANN staff ran away with this comment and falsely told the ICANN Board =
of Directors that ALAC prefers the staff drafted charter. In fact, the =
formal statement actually approved by ALAC said that many members of =
ALAC supported the NCUC proposal and that "the de-linking of Council =
seats from Constituencies is a very good move in the right direction." =20
Myth 7
"The NCUC charter would give the same small group 6 votes instead of 3."
False. For the past 8 months, NCUC has stated that it will dissolve =
when the NCSG is formed. It does not make sense to have a =
"Noncommercial Users Constituency" and a "Noncommercial Stakeholders =
Group," as they are synonymous terms. Thus, NCUC leaders would not be =
in control of a new NCSG - a completely new leadership would be elected. =
Under the NCUC charter proposal, all noncommercial groups and =
individuals would vote on Council seats, not just former NCUC members. =
Strict geographic diversity requirements would mean that candidates from =
throughout the world would have to be selected even if they could not =
get a majority of total votes.=20
Myth 8
"NCUC will not share council seats with other noncommercial =
constituencies."
Wrong. NCUC's proposed charter was designed to allow dozens of new =
noncommercial constituencies to form at will and to advance their own =
candidates for Council seats. Given the diversity and breadth of NCUC's =
membership, many different constituencies with competing agendas are =
likely to form. The organic, bottom-up self-forming approach to =
constituency formation is much better than the board/staff approach - =
and more consistent with the BGC recommendations. The SIC charter makes =
constituency formation very top-heavy and difficult, and gives the staff =
and Board arbitrary power to decide how "representative" or =
"significant" new participants are. Because it ties constituencies to =
Council seats, every new constituency instigates power struggles over =
the allocation of Council seats.=20
Myth 9
"The NCUC wants to take away the Board's right to approve =
constituencies."
False. People who said this have obviously not read the NCUC-proposed =
charter. NCUC's proposal let the board approve or disapprove of new =
constituencies formed under its proposed charter. Our proposal simply =
offered to apply some simple, objective criteria (e.g., number of =
applicants) to new constituency groupings and then make a recommendation =
to the Board. The idea was to reduce the burden of forming a new =
constituency for both the applicants and the Board. NCUC's proposal =
made it easy to form new constituencies, unlike the SIC charter, which =
makes it difficult to form new constituencies.
Myth 10
"The purpose of a constituency is to have your very own GNSO Council =
Seat."
False. Some claim GNSO Council seats must be hard-wired to specific =
constituencies because a constituency is meaningless without a =
guaranteed GNSO Council representative. However this interpretation =
fails to understand the role of constituencies in the new GNSO, which is =
to give a voice and a means of participation in the policy development =
process -- not a guaranteed councilor who has little incentive to reach =
beyond her constituency and find consensus with other constituencies. =
Two of the other three stakeholder groups (Registries and Registrars) =
adopted NCUC's charter approach of decoupling GNSO Council seats to =
constituencies, but NCUC has been prevented from electing its councilors =
on a SG-wide basis.
For more information: http://icann-ncuc.ning.com
Bazlu
_______________________
AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR
Chief Executive Officer
Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication(BNNRC)
&
Member, Strategy Council
UN-Global Alliance for ICT and Development (UN GAID)
=20
House: 13/1, Road:2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207=20
Post Box: 5095, Dhaka 1205 Bangladesh
=20
Phone: 88-02-9130750, 88-02-9138501
01711881647 Fax: 88-02-9138501-105
=20
E-mail: ceo at bnnrc.net, bnnrc at bd.drik.net
www.bnnrc.net
------=_NextPart_000_0109_01CA2360.23E76400
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<H1 style=3D"MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; FONT-VARIANT: small-caps"><FONT =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D5>Top Ten Myths About Civil Society Participation =
in=20
ICANN</FONT></SPAN></H1>
<DIV><SPAN style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 14pt"><FONT color=3D#0000ff size=3D5>From =
The=20
Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: =
medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1pt; BORDER-LEFT: medium =
none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1.5pt solid">
<P=20
style=3D"BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: =
medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium =
none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none"><FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D5>21 August 2009</FONT></P>
<P=20
style=3D"BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: =
medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium =
none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none"></P></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 1</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>=93Civil Society won=92t participate in ICANN under NCUC=92s =
charter=20
proposal.=94</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><I>False.</I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal"><SPAN> =
</SPAN>ICANN=20
staffers and others claim that civil society is discouraged from =
engaging at=20
ICANN because NCUC=92s charter proposal does not guarantee GNSO Council =
seats to=20
constituencies.<SPAN> </SPAN>The facts could not be further from =
the=20
truth.<SPAN> </SPAN>NCUC=92s membership includes 143 noncommercial =
organizations and individuals.<SPAN> </SPAN>Since 2008 NCUC=92s =
membership=20
has increased by more 215%<SPAN> </SPAN>=96 largely in direct =
response to=20
civil society=92s support for the NCUC charter.<SPAN> </SPAN>Not a =
single=20
noncommercial organization commented in the public comment forum that=20
hard-wiring council seats to constituencies will induce their =
participation in=20
ICANN.<SPAN> </SPAN>None of the noncommercial organizations that =
commented=20
on the NCSG Charter said they would participate to ICANN only if NCSG's =
Charter=20
secured the constituencies a guaranteed seat on the GNSO.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 2</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>=93More civil society groups will get involved if the Board=20
intervenes.=94</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><I>A complete illusion.</I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: =
normal"><SPAN> =20
</SPAN>Board imposition of its own charter and its refusal to listen to =
civil=20
society groups will be interpreted as rejection of the many groups that=20
commented and as discrimination against civil society =
participation.<SPAN> =20
</SPAN>ICANN=92s reputation among noncommercial groups will be =
irreparably damaged=20
unless this action is reversed or a compromise is found.<SPAN> =
</SPAN>Even=20
if we were to accept these actions and try to work with them, the total =
impact=20
of the staff/SIC NCSG charter will be to handicap noncommercial groups =
and make=20
them less likely to participate.<SPAN> </SPAN>The appointment of=20
representatives by the Board disenfranchises noncommercial groups and=20
individuals.<SPAN> </SPAN>The constituency-based SIC structure =
requires=20
too much organizational overhead for most noncommercial organizations to =
sustain; it also pits groups against each other in political competition =
for=20
votes and members.<SPAN> </SPAN>Most noncommercial organizations =
will not=20
enter the ICANN GNSO under those conditions.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 3</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>The outpouring of civil society opposition can be dismissed =
as the=20
product of a 'letter writing campaign.' </I></B><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal"></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><I>An outrageous claim</I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: =
normal">.<SPAN> =20
</SPAN>Overwhelming civil society opposition to the SIC charter emerged =
not=20
once, but twice.<SPAN> </SPAN>In addition, there is the massive =
growth in=20
NCUC membership stimulated by the broader community=92s opposition to =
the staff=20
and Board actions. Attempts to minimize the degree to which civil =
society has=20
been undermined by these developments are simply not going to work, and =
reveal a=20
shocking degree of insularity and arrogance.<SPAN> </SPAN>ICANN is =
required to have public comment periods because it is supposed to listen =
to and=20
be responsive to public opinion.<SPAN> </SPAN>Public opinion =
results from=20
networks of communication and public dialogue on controversial issues, =
including=20
organized calls to action.<SPAN> </SPAN>No policy or bylaw gives =
ICANN=20
staff the authority to decide that it can discount or ignore nearly all =
of the=20
groups who have taken an interest in the GNSO reforms, simply because =
they have=20
taken a position critical of the staff=92s.<SPAN> </SPAN>ICANN's =
attempt to=20
discount critical comments by labeling them a "letter writing campaign"=20
undermines future participation and confidence in ICANN public=20
processes.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 4</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>"Civil society is divided on the NCSG charter =
issue."</I></B><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal"></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><I>Wrong.</I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal"> There has =
never been=20
such an overwhelmingly lopsided public comment period in ICANN=92s=20
history.<SPAN> </SPAN>While ICANN=92s staff is telling the Board =
that civil=20
society is divided, the clear, documented consensus among civil society =
groups=20
has been against the ICANN drafted NCSG charter and in favor of the NCUC =
one.<SPAN> </SPAN>Board members who rely only on staff-provided=20
information may believe civil society is divided, but Board members who =
have=20
actually read the public comments can see the solidarity of civil =
society=20
against what ICANN is trying to impose on =
them.<SPAN></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 5</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>"Existing civil society groups are not representative or =
diverse=20
enough."</I></B><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal"></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><I>Untrue by any reasonable standard</I><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal">.<SPAN> </SPAN>The current civil =
society=20
grouping, the Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC), now has 143 =
members=20
including 73 noncommercial organizations and 70 individuals in 48=20
countries.<SPAN> </SPAN>This is an increase of more than 215% =
since the=20
parity principle was established.<A title=3D""=20
href=3D"mhtml:mid://00000228/#1233e4ff337bc68d__ftn1"=20
name=3D1233e4ff337bc68d__ftnref1><SPAN><SPAN>[1]</SPAN></SPAN></A><SPAN>&=
nbsp;=20
</SPAN>Noncommercial participation in ICANN is now more diverse than any =
other=20
constituency, so it is completely unfair to level this charge at NCUC =
without=20
applying it to others.<SPAN> </SPAN>Even back in 2006, an =
independent=20
report by the London School of Economics showed that NCUC was the most =
diverse=20
geographically, had the largest number of different people serving on =
the GNSO=20
Council over time, and the highest turn-over in council representatives =
of any=20
of the 6 constituencies.<SPAN> </SPAN>In contrast, the commercial =
users=92=20
constituency has recycled the same 5 people on the Council for a decade =
and upon=20
the GNSO =93reform=94, the first 3 of 6 GNSO Councilors from the =
Commercial=20
Stakeholder Group will represent the United States.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 6</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>"ALAC prefers the ICANN staff drafted charter over the civil =
society=20
drafted charter."</I></B><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-STYLE: =
normal"><BR></SPAN><I>False.</I><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal"><SPAN> </SPAN>One ALAC leader said =
that she=20
prefers the staff drafted charter.<SPAN> </SPAN>ICANN staff ran =
away with=20
this comment and falsely told the ICANN Board of Directors that ALAC =
prefers the=20
staff drafted charter.<SPAN> </SPAN>In fact, the formal statement =
actually=20
approved by ALAC said that many members of ALAC supported the NCUC =
proposal and=20
that =93the de-linking of Council seats from Constituencies is a very =
good move in=20
the right direction.=94 </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 7</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>"The NCUC charter would give the same small group 6 votes =
instead of=20
3."</I></B><SPAN style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-STYLE: =
normal"></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><I>False</I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal">.<SPAN> =
</SPAN>For the=20
past 8 months, NCUC has stated that it will dissolve when the NCSG is=20
formed.<SPAN> </SPAN>It does not make sense to have a =
"Noncommercial Users=20
Constituency" and a "Noncommercial Stakeholders Group,=94 as they are =
synonymous=20
terms.<SPAN> </SPAN>Thus, NCUC leaders would <U>not</U> be in =
control of a=20
new NCSG =96 a completely new leadership would be elected.<SPAN> =20
</SPAN>Under the NCUC charter proposal, all noncommercial groups and =
individuals=20
would vote on Council seats, not just former NCUC members.<SPAN> =20
</SPAN>Strict geographic diversity requirements would mean that =
candidates from=20
throughout the world would have to be selected even if they could not =
get a=20
majority of total votes. </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 8</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>"NCUC will not share council seats with other noncommercial=20
constituencies."</I></B><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal"></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><I>Wrong</I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal">. NCUC=92s =
proposed=20
charter was designed to allow dozens of new noncommercial constituencies =
to form=20
at will and to advance their own candidates for Council =
seats.<SPAN> =20
</SPAN>Given the diversity and breadth of NCUC's membership, many =
different=20
constituencies with competing agendas are likely to form.<SPAN> =
</SPAN>The=20
organic, bottom-up self-forming approach to constituency formation is =
much=20
better than the board/staff approach =96 and more consistent with the =
BGC=20
recommendations.<SPAN> </SPAN>The SIC charter makes constituency =
formation=20
very top-heavy and difficult, and gives the staff and Board arbitrary =
power to=20
decide how =93representative=94 or =93significant=94 new participants =
are.<SPAN> =20
</SPAN>Because it ties constituencies to Council seats, every new =
constituency=20
instigates power struggles over the allocation of Council seats. =
</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 9</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>"The NCUC wants to take away the Board's right to approve=20
constituencies."</I></B><SPAN=20
style=3D"FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal"></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><I>False. </I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: =
normal"><SPAN> </SPAN>People=20
who said this have obviously not read the NCUC-proposed charter. =
NCUC=92s=20
proposal let the board approve or disapprove of new constituencies =
formed under=20
its proposed charter. Our proposal simply offered to apply some =
simple,=20
objective criteria (e.g., number of applicants) to new constituency =
groupings=20
and then make a recommendation to the Board.<SPAN> </SPAN>The idea =
was to=20
reduce the burden of forming a new constituency for both the applicants =
and the=20
Board.<SPAN> </SPAN>NCUC=92s proposal made it easy to form new=20
constituencies, unlike the SIC charter, which makes it difficult to form =
new=20
constituencies.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><B><I></I></B> </DIV>
<DIV><B><I>Myth 10</I></B></DIV>
<DIV><B><I>=93The purpose of a constituency is to have your very own =
GNSO Council=20
Seat.=94</I></B></DIV>
<DIV>False.<SPAN> </SPAN>Some claim GNSO Council seats must be =
hard-wired=20
to specific constituencies because a constituency is meaningless without =
a=20
guaranteed GNSO Council representative.<SPAN> </SPAN>However this=20
interpretation fails to understand the role of constituencies in the new =
GNSO,=20
which is to give a <I>voice</I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal"> and a =
</SPAN><I>means of participation</I><SPAN style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal"> =
in the=20
policy development process -- not a guaranteed councilor who has little=20
incentive to reach beyond her constituency and find consensus with other =
constituencies.<SPAN> </SPAN>Two of the other three stakeholder =
groups=20
(Registries and Registrars) adopted NCUC=92s charter approach of =
decoupling GNSO=20
Council seats to constituencies, but NCUC has been prevented from =
electing its=20
councilors on a SG-wide basis.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: =
medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 1pt; BORDER-LEFT: medium =
none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1.5pt solid"> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>For more information: <A=20
href=3D"http://icann-ncuc.ning.com">http://icann-ncuc.ning.com</A></FONT>=
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>Bazlu<BR>_______________________<BR>AHM. Bazlur =
Rahman-S21BR<BR>Chief=20
Executive Officer<BR>Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and=20
Communication(BNNRC)<BR>&<BR>Member, Strategy Council<BR>UN-Global =
Alliance=20
for ICT and Development (UN GAID)<BR> <BR>House: 13/1, Road:2, =
Shaymoli,=20
Dhaka-1207 <BR>Post Box: 5095, Dhaka 1205 Bangladesh<BR> <BR>Phone: =
88-02-9130750, 88-02-9138501<BR>01711881647 Fax:=20
88-02-9138501-105<BR> <BR>E-mail: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:ceo at bnnrc.net">ceo at bnnrc.net</A>, <A=20
href=3D"mailto:bnnrc at bd.drik.net">bnnrc at bd.drik.net</A><BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.bnnrc.net">www.bnnrc.net</A><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0109_01CA2360.23E76400--
More information about the Plenary
mailing list