Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1696590786826.pdf (Zimbabwe)
IANA Stewardship Transition & Enhancing ICANN Accountability What is ICANN?

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a global multistakeholder, private sector-led organization that manages Internet resources for the public benefit ¤ ICANN coordinates the top-level of the Internet's system of unique iden;ﬁers via global, mul;stakeholder, boAom-up consensus policy processes, with the outcome of those processes implemented via the IANA Func;ons.
| 2 One World, One Internet | 3 What are the IANA Functions?

The IANA Func;ons evolved in support of the Internet Engineering Task Force, and ini;ally funded via research projects supported by the U. S. Department of Defense, Advance Research Projects Agency.
These functions include: ¤ The coordination of the assignment of technical Internet protocol parameters ¤ The administration of certain responsibilities associated with Internet DNS Root zone management ¤ The allocation of Internet IP addresses ICANN was created to perform the IANA Functions and has done so pursuant to a no-cost contract with the Department of Commerce for over 15 years | 4 What is the multistakeholder community?
“Stakeholder” refers broadly to anyone who has an interest in the Internet Within ICANN, stakeholders include: Large and small businesses Technical community Civil society Governments Researchers and academics End users The multistakeholder community functions on bottom-up consensus building which, by design, is resistant to capture due to the openness, diversity and equal division of authority among participants ICANN’s private sector-led mul;-stakeholder community supports the success of the Internet’s DNS | 5 ICANN’s Global Multistakeholder Community • Private-sector companies • Trade associations • National governments • Distinct economies recognized in international fora • Multinational governmental and treaty organizations • Public authorities (including UN agencies with a direct interest in global Internet Governance) Institutions of higher learning • Academic leaders • • Professors • Students Government & Governmental Organizations Academic Business Internet Users Technical Civil Society Domain Name Industry • Protocol developers • Equipment and software developers • Network operators • Technical researchers • Registries • Registrars • Domain organizations • Non-governmental Organizations • Non-profits • Non-commercial Users • Think Tanks • Charities | 6 The U.S. Government’s Announcement 14 March 2014: U.S. Government announces intent to transition its stewardship of the IANA functions to the global multistakeholder community ¤ Asked ICANN to convene global stakeholders to develop a proposal ¤ The multistakeholder community has set policies implemented by ICANN for more than 15 years The U.S. Government’s announcement: ¤ Marks the final phase of the privatization of the DNS ¤ Further supports and enhances the multistakeholder model of Internet policy making and governance Why now?
ICANN was asked to serve as a facilitator, based on its role as the IANA functions administrator and global coordinator for the Internet’s Domain Name System (DNS) | 7 Why Does This Matter to Business?
¤ Almost $8 trillion exchange hands each year through e-commerce, and the con;nued success of e-commerce is dependent on one, global, secure, stable and interoperable Internet ¤ Business has an important seat at the table in this global conversa;on and needs to be an ac;ve par;cipant in facilita;ng a successful transi;on ¤ The next billion Internet users will connect from developing countries and emerging economies.
Sole U.S. oversight of the IANA func;ons is no longer op;mal given this new global landscape ¡ A successful transi;on would ensure the con;nua;on of a secure, stable and interoperable Internet for all users globally, while failure could result in adverse consequences for global Internet commerce | 8 Why Does This Matter to the Technical Community?

¤ IANA services are core and cri,cal to the use of the Internet Protocol.
¤ For several years the technical community has called for an end to the NTIA contract ¡ This is an opportunity for the community to show how serious it is in further developing this model of Internet Governance ¤ You have a lot of experience in the boAom-up and mul;stakeholder policy development processes ¤ Your par;cipa;on and engagement into the process is cri;cal in this evolu;on of Internet Governance to maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet DNS and to ensure the IANA func;ons con;nue mee;ng the needs and expecta;ons of the global customers and partners | 9 Why Does This Matter to Governments?
¤ The IANA Stewardship Transi;on is important for all stakeholders, especially for governments given their responsibility over Internet public policy issues ¤ Successful comple;on of the IANA Stewardship Transi;on recognizes that no single government – or group of governments – should have any form of control over the security, stability and interoperability of the Domain Name System (DNS) ¡ This will help ensure the con;nued openness, interoperability and stability of the Internet which both countries and their ci;zens economically, socially and culturally beneﬁt from ¤ The IANA Stewardship Transi;on proposal will be accompanied by signiﬁcant proposals to further enhance ICANN’s accountability to the en;re Internet Community; including governments (on an equal foo;ng) | 10 Why Does This Matter to Civil Society?
¤ Although the IANA func;ons are opera;onal func;ons, they do require global governance and stewardship ¤ The exper;se from the non-governmental organiza;on community is essen;al, especially due to: ¡ Its exper,se in holding governance en;;es accountable ¡ Its experience in understanding and explaining public interest ¡ Its ability to be innova;ve and propose solu;ons ¤ Your par;cipa;on, and that of your networks, is cri;cal in this evolu;on of Internet Governance to ensure excellence in the proposals and the legi;macy of the processes ¤ This is a chance to strengthen an inclusive, transparent, global and collabora;ve model of governance that is ﬁt for our present and future | 11 Transition Requirements set by NTIA NTIA has stated that the transition proposal must have broad community support and address the following four principles: Support and enhance the multistakeholder model Maintain the security, stability and resiliency of the Internet DNS Meet the needs and expectations of the global customers and partners of the IANA services Maintain the openness of the Internet NTIA also specified that it will not accept a proposal that replaces the NTIA role with a government-led or intergovernmental organization solution.
| 12 Two Parallel Processes The community developed and is following two parallel processes: IANA Stewardship Transition Focused on delivering a proposal to transition the stewardship of the IANA functions to the multistakeholder community Enhancing ICANN Accountability Focused on ensuring that ICANN remains accountable in the absence of its historical contractual relationship with the U.S. Government To drive the processes, the community created multilayered, transparent and diverse working groups to foster discussion and within those groups, has developed working methods and systems for determining consensus | 13 Developing Proposals NTIA Announcement and Criteria ICANN ICG CWG Stewardship Z CRISP IANAPLAN CWG Proposal CRISP Proposal IANAPLAN Proposal CCWG Accountability ICG Proposal Linkage ICANN Board NTIA CCWG Proposal | 14 IANA STEWARDSHIP TRANSITION Request for Transition Proposal Structure Names Proposal Numbers Proposal Protocol Parameters Proposal Meetings Mailing list discussion Public comments Meetings Mailing list discussion Public comments Meetings Mailing list discussion Public comments ICG (Combined) Proposal | 16 Proposal Overview Names proposal overview Current Contract Post-transition IANA STEWARDSHIP TRANSITION PROPOSAL // 11 NTIA CONTRACT OVERSIGHT IANA STEWARDSHIP IANA FUNCTIONS OPERATOR ICANN ICANN BOARD CONTRACT LEGAL SEPARATION POST-TRANSITION IANA (PTI) REVIEWS INITIAL SERVICE ISSUES OR COMPLAINTS BOARD CUSTOMERS IFR IANA FUNCTION REVIEW SPECIAL IFR CSC CUSTOMER STANDING COMMITTEE IANA
 SECONDARY SERVICE ISSUES OR COMPLAINTS (ESCALATION PATH) | 17 Proposal Overview | 18 Proposal Overview Protocol parameters proposal overview IANA STEWARDSHIP TRANSITION PROPOSAL // 25 Current Contract Post-transition NTIA OVERSIGHT CONTRACT ICANN IANA IETF Protocol Specifications and Standards Development Process IAB OVERSIGHT MoU + ANNUAL UPDATES BASED ON IETF Protocol Specifications and Standards Development Process IAB OVERSIGHT MoU + ANNUAL UPDATES BASED ON ICANN IANA PERFORMANCE METRICS PERFORMANCE METRICS | 19 Combined Proposal Overview Combined proposal IANA STEWARDSHIP TRANSITION PROPOSAL // 28 RIRs ASO MoU SLA ADVICE REVIEW COMMITTEE ICANN BOARD REVIEW PERFORMANCE CONTRACT(S) POST-TRANSITION IANA (PTI) PARAMETERS FUNCTIONS NUMBERS FUNCTIONS NAMES FUNCTIONS BOARD IFR IANA FUNCTION REVIEW CSC CUSTOMER STANDING COMMITTEE IETF Protocol Specifications and Standards Development Process IAB OVERSIGHT MoU + ANNUAL UPDATES BASED ON PERFORMANCE VMETRICS | 20 ENHANCING ICANN ACCOUNTABILITY Enhancing ICANN Accountability As initial discussions around the transition took place, the community raised the broader topic of the impact of the change on ICANN’s accountability.
¤ The transition would end the U.S. Government’s historical contractual relationship with ICANN ¤ This relationship has been perceived as a backstop with regard to ICANN’s organization-wide accountability As a result ICANN launched a second process, parallel but interrelated with the IANA Stewardship Transition process, to examine from an organizational perspective how ICANN’s broader accountability mechanisms should be strengthened to address the absence of the U.S. Government.
| 22 Existing ICANN Accountability Mechanisms 1 Aﬀirmation of Commitments 2 Aﬀirmation of Commitments Reviews 3 Bylaws 4 Bylaws-Mandated Redress Mechanism 5 Documentation for Board of Directors 6 Documented Relationships 7 External Laws 8 General ICANN Operational Information 9 ICANN Board Selection Process 10 Organizational Reviews | 23 Current Accountability Framework The CCWG-Accountability iden;ﬁed four building blocks that would form the mechanisms required to improve ICANN’s accountability.
AC SO AC SO AC SO AC The ICANN Community is organized in three Suppor;ng Organiza;ons (SOs) and four Advisory CommiAees (ACs).

ICANN Board has the ul;mate authority to approve or reject policy recommenda;ons, developed by the SOs.

ACs formally advise the ICANN Board on par;cular issues or policy areas.

BYLAWS The Principles guarantee the mission, commitments and core values of ICANN through its bylaws.

Independent Appeals Mechanisms confers the power to review and provide redress, as needed.
| 24 Proposed Enhanced Accountability Mechanisms The CCWG-Accountability has iden;ﬁed enhancements required to those building blocks that would form the accountability mechanisms required to improve ICANN’s accountability.

1 2 3 4 5 REVIEW / REJECT • • • BUDGET STRATEGY/OPS PLAN BYLAWS AC SO AC SO AC SO AC The Empowered Community refers to the powers that allow the community SOs & ACs to take ac;on should ICANN breach the principles (i.e.

the People).
the People).

Fundamental Bylaws BYLAWS NEW REMOVE / RECALL STRUCTURAL REVIEW As Community accountability ICANN Board has the ul;mate authority to approve or reject policy recommenda;ons, developed by the SOs.

ACs formally advise the ICANN Board on par;cular issues or policy areas (i.e.

the Execu;ve).

NEW IRP 7+ MEMBER STANDING PANEL Exis;ng + New mechanisms+ AoC Reviews The Principles guarantee the core mission, commitments and values of ICANN through its bylaws (i.e.

the Cons;tu;on).
the Cons;tu;on).

Independent Appeals Mechanisms confers the power to review and provide redress, as needed (i.e.

the Judiciary).

| 25 The Empowered Community’s Powers The CCWG-Accountability recommends the ICANN community be empowered with ﬁve dis,nct powers.

1.

Reconsider/reject Budget or Strategy/Opera,ng Plan This power would give the community the ability to consider strategic/opera;ng plans and budgets ader they are approved by the Board (but before they come into eﬀect) and reject them.

2.
2.

Reconsider/reject changes to ICANN “Standard” Bylaws This power would give the community the ability to reject proposed Bylaws changes ader they are approved by the Board but before they come into eﬀect.

3.

Approve changes to “Fundamental” Bylaws This power would form part of the process set out for agreeing any changes of the “fundamental” bylaws.
It requires that the community would have to give posi;ve assent to any change, a co- decision process between the Board and the community and that such changes would require a higher vote.

Remove individual ICANN Board Directors The community organiza;on that appointed a given director could end their term and trigger a replacement process.

The general approach, consistent with the law, is that the appoin;ng body is the removing body.

5.
5.

Recall en,re ICANN Board This power would allow the community to cause the removal of the en;re ICANN Board.

(expected to be used only in excep;onal circumstances).
| 26 Work Streams & Implementation Possible tracks for implementa,on of Work Stream 1: • • • • • • Revising Mission, Commitments and Core Values Establishing Fundamental Bylaws Comple;ng the IRP enhancements Establishing Community empowerment mechanism and incorpora;on of the community Powers into the Bylaws Implemen;ng the AoC reviews into the Bylaws Comple;ng the Reconsidera;on process enhancements Elements considered for Work Stream 2: • • • • • • Reﬁning the opera,onal details of WS1 proposals Further assessing enhancements to government par,cipa,on in ICANN Considering the issue of jurisdic,on Enhancing SO/AC accountability Ins;tu;ng a culture of transparency within the ICANN organiza;on Considering improvements to diversity in all its aspects at all levels of the organiza;on • Deﬁning the modali;es of how ICANN integrates human rights impact analyses, within its mission 2015 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 2016 Work Stream 1 Development (and iden;fying topics for Work Stream 2) Work Stream 1 Implementa;on Work Stream 2 Development Frankfurt Istanbul Paris Work Stream 2 Implementa;on ICANN 52 ICANN 53 ICANN 54 ICANN 55 ICANN 56 ICANN 57 | 27 Where are we now?
| 28 What Can I Do Now To Get Involved?

Join a working group ¤ CCWG-Accountability, contact acct-staﬀ@icann.org Participate in a public comment period Par;cipa;ng in public comment periods is an integral part of ICANN’s inclusive and boAom-up model of proposal development Stay up to date on recent developments ¤ Visit: https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability ¤ Follow @ICANN on Twitter or like ICANN on Facebook ¤ Subscribe to ICANN news alerts | 29 Questions?
Thank You and Questions Website: https://www.icann.org/ stewardship-accountability twitter.com/icann facebook.com/icannorg IANA Stewardship Transition https://www.icann.org/stewardship ¤ Latest news and information on the IANA Stewardship Transition and ICG ¤ Community participation information ¤ Resources and archives from ICG meetings Enhancing ICANN Accountability https://community.icann.org/category/accountability ¤ Latest news and information on the Enhancing ICANN Accountability process and CCWG ¤ Announcements and upcoming events | 30