Page History

...

Third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) Draft Report
Executive Summary TBDTBC.

The ALAC noted the ATRT review has produced a considerable amount of work in little time and this is laudable. Nevertheless, from an end-user perspective, ATRT should consider deliberating the following questions: (1) How can ICANN better address conflicts of interest? The ICANN community is relatively small, with relatively few actors involved in the process. Conflicts of interest, perceived or real, can impact negatively on ICANN’s standing; (2) How can transparency be increased? (3) How can ICANN ensure that in cases where issues persist, processes are initiated to correct trajectory? (For example, if multiple reviews identify the same issue or if they find implementation to be lacking, how can this be fast-tracked transparently and effectively?) (4) Might it be necessary to “silo off” or ring-fence certain functions, including reviews, compliance, and other types of community oversight? (5) How can ICANN improve their responsiveness to community and review team questions and affairs, and what policies should be created to ensure these are dealt with? The ALAC also suggested taking several noted options into consideration, emphasizing from an end user perspective, more, not less, accountability and transparency is required from the ICANN community and org. 

Overall, the ALAC supports the suggested changes to the ICANN Public Comment, public input as well as the accountability indicators. We believe those changes would make the Public Comments more effective and show better transparency. We strongly believe that a wide, open and inclusive process should be maintained in policy development process especially with input representing the multistakeholder environment. Policy development must be transparent, efficient and should not be biased or skewed towards a group.

ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on ISOC/PIR Issue (submitted to the ICANN Board on 31 January 2020)
Executive Summary TBC:

...