...

Thematic Group 4: ICANN Transparency and Accountability

Abstract: 

ATRT Final Recommendation #9 generally reflects the community feedback on existing appeals mechanisms and

...

includes a set of necessary improvements. Rec.9.2 is particularly important for accountability of decision-making process and reform of appeal mechanism. It is insightful to form a SCG to examine the options to restructure the current Board reconsideration process and the Independent Review Process (IRP).

It is still unclear whether the review/restructure will cover the other "appeal" mechanisms found in the various gTLDs and ccTLDs processes.  Will improved appeals mechanisms take into account  the processing of reconsideration requests and objections on decisions made in the new gTLD program by ICANN or its dispute reso9lution providers,  or will it apply to a review procedure for decisions made in IDN ccTLD program, for issues such as string similarity. It is especially unclear whether Board reconsideration process and the IRP  will remain the only or the  "final" appeal channel available for reviewing other appeals decisions, either from internal bodies or outside service providers.

As we have not seen what the Board intends to do about recommendation 9.2  it is good to be

...

cautious.  But if

...

the Board and ICANN staff do honor the suggestion for a community wide discussion of ICANN accountability and appeals, then At-large needs a strategy for contributing to that and needs to begin substantive work on identifying the features required in a well formed ICANN appeals process.  In developing accountability mechanisms, from a At-Large perspective,  discussion needs to extend to all of the At-Large Structures (ALS) so that they can contribute from the diversity of global user experience on accountability and transparency and access to appeals mechanisms, that only At-Large can bring to ICANN.

Questions raised by the community:

...