SCN: ICANN

[Steve]

x-no-archive: yes

=======================

Report Sees Major Hurdles for Internet Election  

by Jeri Clausing   

(NY Times)---An international plan to create the Internet's first 
democracy is plagued by skepticism, conflicting goals and a lack of 
accountability, which will make it nearly impossible for the Internet's 
new oversight organization to hold a fair election in September, 
according to a report to be released on Friday.  

The report stops short of recommending that the organization, the 
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), 
postpone its September election, which will ultimately determine the 
final 9 members on its 18-seat board. But it clearly states that major 
improvements should be made before the group proceeds with its 
plan to let individual computer users around the world vote, and 
before the group can earn the legitimacy that it needs to move 
forward.  

"This plan is clearly not ready for prime time," said Jerry Berman, 
executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, 
which wrote the report with Common Cause, both public interests 
groups based in Washington.  

Esther Dyson, interim chairwoman of ICANN, called the report 
sensible but said the board would not postpone the election.  

"The basic message from them is, go slow," she said. "And our 
basic message is we have got to move forward. We agree with you 
that it is experimental and we are putting in as many checks and 
balances as we can."  

Dyson, who made her comments in a telephone interview from 
Britain, added: "Let's stop fooling around. This has been going on 
long enough. We need to make mistakes to correct them. There is 
no way to avoid mistakes because we are moving into new turf. But 
we can work to minimize them."  

ICANN's proposal would allow any Internet user over the age of 16 
who has an e-mail and postal address to participate in the 
international election of a special council, which in turn would 
appoint the nine board members.  

The key problems with that plan are a lack of understanding about 
what ICANN's mission is and the absence of controls to keep the 
election council from being captured by special interests.  

"Until these fundamental concerns are fully addressed, this election 
will not be able to confer the consent of the governed onto ICANN," 
the report states. "Instead, the initial election can only be viewed as 
an experiment in democracy that must be re-evaluated if it is ever to 
confer legitimacy."  

The report recommends that ICANN change its rules to allow for 
direct elections. But Dyson said that would not happen.  

"That decision has been made," she said. "I think the board is very 
open to iterative improvements as we go along. But we are moving 
forward."  

The groups will officially present their findings to ICANN at its board 
meeting next week in Cairo. Although the report details widespread 
skepticism and problems with the election plan, Berman said it is 
intended to be a resource that will help ICANN and other interested 
parties debate the issues and reach a consensus on how to improve 
them.  

Their main message, the reports authors say, is to place the goal of 
holding effective elections ahead of the goal of completing them by 
September.  

"There is a way to do these elections in a way that would be fair and 
efficient," said Scott Harshbarger, president of Common Cause. "We 
are urging them to take some time and take the opportunity to use 
Cairo to really discuss this."  

The study was commission through a grant from the Markle 
Foundation last year. Markle officials, who have committed a $1 
million in grants to help advance public interest in Internet 
governance issues, said they would not take a position on the 
report, although the group was pleased with its depth.  

"In a short time they not only thought through some very difficult 
issues, but they really succeeded in getting input from key 
constituencies, including nonprofits, academics and industry 
groups, international advocates and experts in democracy and 
voting systems," said Andrew Shapiro, a senior advisor at the 
foundation.  

ICANN was selected by the Clinton administration in late 1998 to 
administer the Internet's addressing, or domain name system, 
which was previously run by federal contractors.  

Initially operating under the direction of an interim board appointed 
by a small group of Internet founders and insiders, ICANN's main 
charge was to introduce competition into the business of registering 
domain names and to build a membership that represents the global 
Internet community.  

For the past year and a half, however, most of its organizational 
energy has focused on creating three so-called "supporting 
organizations" of business groups that will provide the bulk of 
financing for the nonprofit group. Those constituencies were 
officially recognized last year and their board members installed 
last fall.  

So the last big task for ICANN's initial board is to create the at-large 
constituency to elect the board members who will replace them. And 
that is no small feat. With a limited budget and just a few 
employees, the organization has been the victim of constant tension 
between groups pushing it move faster and others urging it to slow 
down.  

The at-large election debate in Cairo will likely be no different. Under 
pressure by both its own bylaws and those who have in the past 
criticized its lack of official representation of noncommercial 
interests, ICANN last week launched a Web site where computer 
users can register to become members. Those registrations, 
however, are tentative, with the understanding that final details 
about exactly who qualifies, whether they will be required to pay a 
fee and how their voices will be counted -- through a direct election 
or a council -- will be resolved in Cairo.  

And while the report recommends specific changes like those 
involving election procedures, Berman and Harshbarger said even 
more fundamental questions need to be answered by ICANN before 
such a vote should proceed.  

Specifically, they said, ICANN needs to more clearly define what its 
mission is and adopt language that limits its scope of power.  

While ICANN's official mission is to oversee the operations of the 
domain name system, one of its first policy decisions last year was 
to lay down rules for resolving "cybersquatting" cases, which 
involve disputes over the use of trademarks in domain names.  

That has caused widespread confusion about the scope of ICANN's 
power, Berman said. "They've got a mission problem," Berman 
said. "There are millions of potential voters. They are saying, 'Join 
our bottoms-up organization,' which is fine. But they have not 
clarified for the world what ICANN's mission is. And it is very difficult 
to have an election without knowing what the mission is and very 
difficult to govern without knowing what their mission is."

Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company 





* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *