|Vote Open||Vote Close||Date of Submission||Staff Contact and Email||Statement Number|
|17.03.2015||GNSO Policy & Implementation Initial Recommendations Report||ADOPTED 13Y, 0N, 0A||Holly Raiche||03.03.2015||10.03.2015 23:59 UTC||14.03.2015 14:00 UTC||17.03.2015 20:00 UTC||17.03.2015|
FINAL VERSION TO BE SUBMITTED IF RATIFIED
FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC
REVISED - 14 March 2015, 19:20 UTC
The ALAC generally supports the proposed principles, particularly that it must be based on the ICANN Multistakeholder Model and that the policy development processes must function in a bottom up manner. We particularly support the recognition that implementation is an integral and continuing part of the policy process that should allow for ongoing dialogue and collaboration with all stakeholders particularly including users.
Our one concern is with the principles that apply to Policy and Implementation, specifically when new or additional policy issues are introduced in the implementation process. Those issues should rightly be referred back to the Chartering Organisation. But because those new issues may well include policy issues that involve public interest issues, resolution of the new issues must involved all impacted stakeholders, including those who can represent public interest aspects of the issue. However, the ALAC does have concerns about the ability of the GNSO to effectively address such issues where the desired outcomes of contracted parties are in direct conflict with those that support the public interest and Internet users.
For Proposed new additional GNSO processes - The ALAC generally supports the introduction of new processes that may be able to deal with some matters in a more appropriate way. However, in more complex implementation processes, reference of issues back to the GNSO may have the overall effect of creating a very long implementation period. We suggest, therefore, stress testing to better understand the effect of the changes, and that the changes should be reviewed within a reasonably short space of time to ensure they have achieved their goal of better, and potentially speedier, responses to issues.
FIRST DRAFT SUBMITTED
Background (NOT part of the Statement)
First please note, For this non-PDP process, there are two choices in how to respond. the first is by filling in a survey (a bit about who the responder is and whether they are responding on behalf of a group/organisation) and then a questionnaire with space provided for specific questions being asked. Specifically, they invite comments for working definitions, comments related to policy and implementation principles, comments relating to proposed additional new GNSO processes and then general comments. Alternatively, we can respond in the more traditional way through one statement. Alan has suggested the former process.
Their suggested principles include support for the multi-stakeholder model, for accountability, transparency etc - which we support. Principle 3 is new and important - quoting the reports;
Implementation should be regarded as an integral and continuing part of the process rather than an administrative follow-on, and should be seen as a process that allows for dialogue and collaboration among those implementing the policy (e.g. Board, staff, and IRT) and those that developed it and/or are affected by the implementation (e.g. GNSO or any SO or AC).
The other important principle is that if new policies are introduced during the implementation process, the issues should be communicated to the relevant chartering organisation.
ALAC Statement on the GNSO Policy & Implementation Initial Recommendations Report
For definitions: no comment
For policy and implementation: The ALAC generally supports the proposed principles, and particularly the recognition that implementation is an integral and continuing part of the process that allows for ongoing dialogue and collaboration with all stakeholders particularly including users. However, if new or additional policy issues arise during implementation, it is not sufficient that the matter be referred back to the chartering organisation, the GNSO Council. The ALAC has very strong concerns with bringing new or additional issues, particularly those with potential impacts on public interest, back to the GNSO Council rather than the Board. It is not clear whether the GNSO can truly address issues where the public interest is a direct odds with contracts parties’ interests. This would be particularly true if both contracted party SGs are opposed to an issue. At Board level, input from all SOs and ACs can be fully considered.
For Proposed new additional GNSO processes - The ALAC generally supports the introduction of new processes that may be able to deal with some matters in a more appropriate way. However, before the new processes are introduced the WG should stress test the various processes to ensure that, when implemented, the policy process does not become unworkable to deal with substantive policy issues in deciding which of the processes to use. Further, if the new processes are introduced, they should be reviewed within a reasonably short space of time to ensure they have achieved their goal of better, and potentially speedier, responses to issues.