[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]
[Notes from GAC presentation]
Notes on GAC Communique
1. GAC reaffirms GAC principles and comments on ERC documents.
Some statements of disassociation attached.
2. Satisfied with Mission Statements and Core Values.
Core Value 11: Majority wants government role mentioned
explicitly, US government doesn't.
9. GAC majority: GAC is principal forum for the international
discussion of public policy issues related to the
ICANN mission and DNS. Germany + France disagree.
11. GAC does not support direct contribution to ICANN budget,
except for GAC secretariat. Beneficiaries should pay.
12. ICANN must have enough staffing and funing to execute
decision making and operation.
13. GAC majority: Chair non-voting ex-officiso Board liaison.
France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland do not support GAC
member on the Board. Germany: Board should be smaller.
14. Broad ranging dialogue between ICANN Board and GAC.
15. GAC majority: No strong opinion on NomCom, ICANN internal
issue. Minority, including France and Germany, express
discomfort with NomCom. Germany: Evaluating individuals
even after objective criteria would be highly subjective;
bottom-up represented by top-down. Spain: Discomfort with
GAC members in NomCom. Malaysia: If GAC delegate, no
16. GAC does not support selecting of staff members of public
authorities to the Board.
17. GAC stresses internationalization, transparency, fairness,
18. GAC majority support non-voting liaisons to SOs and RSSAC.
Brazil: Regular participation of SO and AC representatives in
GAC. Germany: Voting liaison on CNSO.
19. GAC majority: IANA contact point for governments.
22. GAC supports timely circulation of all policy proposals.
Germany + Spain disagree.
23. GAC calls for mechanism to allow GAC to put issues
to the Board directly.
24. GAC advice on public policy matters must duly taking into
account at policy drafting and decision-taking stage. If
Board view in conflict with GAC advice, GAC and ICANN Board
will try to find mutually acceptable solution. In absence
of agreement, Board will act according to its own best judgment.
25. GAC supports call for using external expert bodies advice,
27. Institutionalize ability of ICANN Board to refer specific
issues to recognized outside experts.
31. GAC expects implementation planning untik Shanghai.
32. GAC encourages ICANN to consider whether it should continue
to operate a registry and a root server.
Re 9: France and Germany:
Due to evolutionary nature of ICANN's mission, different
organization of government participation may be
contemplated in the future.
Re 22:Germany and Spain:
GAC calls for compulsory prior consultation on public
In case of conflict, decisions of ICNAN Board against
GAC advice do not prejudice government steps to protect
ITU disassociates itself from parts of GAC statement