[discuss] Problem definition 1, version 5
jmamodio at gmail.com
Sat Jan 25 14:26:30 UTC 2014
I didn't say that the constituencies are not represented on the Board but
that the decision power is on the Board, and by its articles of
incorporation while some powers are provided to its "members" the
organization up today has elected not to have "members."
You as a top ICANN executive should "factually" know that.
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 4:37 AM, Nigel Hickson <nigel.hickson at icann.org>wrote:
> Just to note; factually that ICANN does have Constituency representation
> on its Board
> Best. Nigel
> Sent from my iPhone
> > On 24 Jan 2014, at 21:07, "Jorge Amodio" <jmamodio at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I agree but I believe international organizations are more complex than
> just the agreement with a host country or location of incorporation, the
> "immunity" comes from multilateral agreements among state members.
> > There is another tangential issue, like in the case of ICANN, that by
> the way the organization has been incorporated, it is not quite true that
> it is a fully multistakeholder in how it runs, given that the board of
> directors have all decision power being the constituencies just advisory
> bodies. There is no true membership in
> > ICANN, so the organization per-se is not multistakeholder but the policy
> development process is.
> > If we want to make progress into the governance of ICANN and then its
> further internationalization we should also consider making the
> constituencies actual members of the organization regardless of the host
> > Regards
> > -Jorge
> >> On Jan 24, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Ben fuller <ben at fuller.na> wrote:
> >> Jorge,
> >> There are two issues here, the first is how you establish an
> institution someplace where it is immune from government coercion. The
> examples I gave are just that examples, but they do reflect organisations
> that are somewhat removed from local government influence. I did say there
> are probably others. We can examine the ways these are structured to get
> some idea of what it takes to create a "denationalised" institution.
> >> The second point is how these institutions chose to run themselves:
> multi stakeholder, command driven, board of elders, etc.
> >> Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss