This is the At-Large Workspace for the development of the ALAC Statement on the Proposed New GNSO Policy Development Process
The public comment announcement is available at: Proposed New GNSO Policy Development Process (closes 1 April 2011)
PDP-WT Proposed Final Report – http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pdp-wt-proposed-final-report-21feb11-en.pdf [PDF, 1.21 MB] PDP-WT Proposed Final Report – Executive Summary Only – http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pdp-wt-executive-summary-proposed-final-report-21feb11-en.pdf [PDF, 580 KB]
The ALAC would like to commend the Proposed Final Report of the Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) concerning the development of, and transition to, a new GNSO Policy Development Process.
Being highly supportive of the ICANN Board approved set of recommendations designed to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy activities, structure, operations, and communications, the ALAC is pleased to have been able to contribute significantly to the proposed Final Report.
1. Streamlining of the Process
The ALAC supports the appropriate operating principles, rules and procedures applicable to a new Policy Development Process (PDP). By starting with an Issue Identification Process, Scoping and request for an Issue Report; a new mandatory Public Comment period on the Preliminary Issue Report; and a Council vote before initiation of the Policy Development Process, we are ensuring that Policy Development Processes are based on thoroughly-researched, well scoped objectives, and are run in a predictable manner that will yield results that can be implemented effectively.
2. Advisory Committee Involvement
The ALAC is pleased to see that the Draft Report recommends maintaining the three methods of beginning the PDP process that are currently enshrined in the ICANN Bylaws (Board, Advisory Committee and GNSO). Although to date, only the ALAC has requested and Issue Report leading to a PDP, it is crucial that all Advisory Committees (AC) have the ability to focus attention on gTLD policy issues that they believe are important to ICANN and its various stakeholders. Although the GNSO Council is firmly in control of whether or not to initiate a PDP, it is important that each AC can request that an issue that is critical to that AC receives proper focus from the GNSO.
The ALAC is also pleased to see a new appeal process added to address the case of the GNSO deciding not to initiate a PDP requested by an AC. Although such a case has never occurred, it is important that all decisions in an organization such as ICANN have in place due process in place to address such possibilities.
3. The Working Group Model
The ALAC has pointed out that although the Working Group model is the current method of choice for ICANN policy development, this may change over time, and that we should not lock ourselves into processes if and when they prove to be less than optimal. This position was supported in the recently adopted GNSO Working Group Guidelines when it allowed for other models to be used assuming proper procedures are established. The ALAC is pleased to see that the PDP-WT has supported this flexibility.
4. Multilingual and Multicultural Dimension
The GNSO Improvements Report, approved by the Board, identified one key objective as follows: Maximize the ability for all interested stakeholders to participate in the GNSO’s Policy Development Processes. The ALAC is satisfied that this objective has been addressed in the proposed Final Report of the PDP-WT. To maximize the ability for participation, it is important that all the necessary facilities are provided.
There are 130 At-Large Structures throughout the world and they come from very diverse cultures and communities with different languages.
The ALAC is satisfied that the PDP-WT recognized the importance of translation to facilitate participation of non-English speakers in the GNSO Policy Development Process and approves the following PDP-WT recommendations:
- At a minimum the following PDP outputs should be translated in the five (5) OfficialUN Languages:
- Working Group Charter (including any amendments)
- Executive Summary of Initial, Final or any other report that is put out for public comment, including recommendations (if not included in the Executive Summary)
- Public comments should be received in other languages and where feasible, these comments should also be translated back into English.
- ICANN is encouraged to consider whether the use of volunteers to assist with translation is appropriate and practical as a cost-cutting measure while it is considering the enhancements of the translation strategy, which is part of the overall strategic plan.
The ALAC appreciates that this is a difficult and expensive process, but is pleased that ICANN is moving to equitably fulfill its global mandate.
Summary
Overall, the ALAC is aware of and appreciates the immense effort that has gone into the current draft Report. It also appreciates the fact that the recommended process is both rigorous and at the same time sufficiently flexible to allow the PDP to meet the community's needs as they evolve, and to meet the varying requirements of as-yet unknown Policy challenges.
1 Comment
Dave Kissoondoyal
ALAC comments on the Proposed Final Report of the Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT)
ALAC would like to commend the Proposed Final Report of the Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) concerning the development of, and transition to, a new GNSO policy development process.,
Being highly supportive of the ICANN Board approved set of recommendations designed to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy activities, structure, operations, and communications, ALAC is pleased to have been able to contribute significantly to the proposed Final Report.
1. Streamlining of the Process
ALAC totally approves the appropriate operating principles, rules and procedures applicable to a new Policy Development Process. Starting with an Issue Identification Process, Scoping and request for an issue report; going through the Advisory Committee input, Council votes and Public Comment Period, before initiation of the Policy Development Process, we are ensuring that policy development processes are based on thoroughly-researched, well scoped objectives, and are run in a predictable manner that yields results that can be implemented effectively
2. ALAC concerns on the Working Group Model
The ALAC stressed that Prior to formally institutionalizing the WG model, the PDP WT should undertake or commission a review of whether the WG model is in fact optimal for addressing PDP issues. We are happy that this concern has been thoroughly discussed in the PDP WT. It was suggested that the PDP-WT could call for the evaluation of the WG model which should assess whether there are stages in the PDP that are more suitable for WGs and those that might be more suitable for formal advice from Stakeholder Groups / Constituencies. It was also noted that new models might emerge; therefore, the PDP should not be restricted to only WGs but leave flexibility for future adoption of alternative mechanisms. The WT debated whether there should be overall principles that any method should contain such e.g. representativeness.
We are happy that this has let to Recommendation 24 in the Proposed Final Report, which stipulates as follows:
Recommendation 24.
The PDP-WT recommends that even though a Working Group currently forms the basic mode of operation for a PDP, there should be flexibility to accommodate different working methods if deemed appropriate by the GNSO Council, in accordance with the GNSO Operating Rules. Any such new working methods must contain each of the elements set forth in the ICANN Bylaws and PDP Manual.
3. Multilingual and Multicultural Dimension
The GNSO Improvements Report, approved by the Board, identified one key objective as follows: Maximize the ability for all interested stakeholders to participate in the GNSO’s Policy Development Processes. ALAC is satisfied that this objective has been taken care in the proposed Final Report of the PDP-WT. To maximize the ability for participation, it is important that all the necessary facilities are provided.
There are 130 At-Large Structures throughout the World and they come from diverse cultures and communities with different languages.
Recommendation 10 of the ALAC Review WG on ALAC Improvements (http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/alac/final-report-alac-review-09jun09-en.pdf recognizes that ALAC, as the representative body for At Large, is the primary organizational home for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user in ICANN processes, although ICANN’s multi-stakeholder model provides opportunity for individual users to choose to participate in many other ways in the ICANN process.
Because of the diversity, in the Westlake report, Recommendation 22 stipulates that ICANN should continue to work on its language policy, including translation and other services.
ALAC is satisfied that PDP-WT recognizes the importance of translation to facilitate participation of non-English speakers in the GNSO Policy Development Process and approves the following PDP-WT recommendations:
1. At a minimum the following PDP outputs should be translated in the 5 UN Languages:
- Working Group Charter (including any amendments)
- Executive Summary of Initial, Final or any other report that is put out for public comment, including recommendations (if not included in the Executive Summary)
2. Public comments should be received in other languages and where feasible, these comments should also be translated back into English.
3. ICANN is encouraged to consider whether the use of volunteers to assist with translation is appropriate and practical as a cost-cutting measure while it is considering the enhancements of the translation strategy, which is part of the overall strategic plan.