Changes

==Overview==

==Overview==

[[ICANN]] relies on certain advisory committees to receive guidance and advice related to the interests and needs of stakeholders who are not able to directly participate in the Supporting Organizations; one of these advisory committees is the Governmental Advisory Committee, which is composed of representatives of national governments from all over the world.  

[[ICANN]] relies on certain advisory committees to receive guidance and advice related to the interests and needs of stakeholders who are not able to directly participate in the Supporting Organizations. One of these advisory committees is the Governmental Advisory Committee, which is composed of representatives of national governments from all over the world.  

The GAC provides its advice and guidance upon request. One of its most important responsibilities is its duty to analyze ICANN's activities and policies as they might influence governments, especially with regards to the interaction between [[ICANN]]'s policies and national laws or international agreements.<ref>[http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/ICANN_Governmental_Advisory_Committee GAC considerations]</ref>

The GAC provides its advice and guidance upon request. One of its most important responsibilities is analyzing ICANN's activities and policies as they might influence governments, especially with regards to the interaction between [[ICANN]]'s policies and national laws or international agreements.<ref>[http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/ICANN_Governmental_Advisory_Committee GAC considerations], Wikia.com.</ref>

The GAC has the duty to incorporate the diverse opinions and perspective of its members when supplying advice to [[ICANN]], and it's imperative that its members stay informed about new Internet trends and pending policy issues.

The GAC has the duty to incorporate the diverse opinions and perspective of its members when supplying advice to [[ICANN]], and it's imperative that its members stay informed about new Internet trends and pending policy issues. The organization is constantly looking for new members, especially those from developing countries, in order to increase global awareness, increase participation, and make sure that ICANN reflects global diversity.

===GAC Structure===

===GAC Structure===

The GAC has more than 100 members; and three of its important organizational features are:

The GAC has more than 100 members, and three of its important organizational features are:

* GAC structure consists of elected officers, a Chairman and 3 Vice-chair which include:

* A structure consisting of elected officers, a Chairman and 3 Vice-chair which include:

** [[Heather Dryden]], Canada (Chairman)

** [[Heather Dryden]], Canada (Chairman)

** [[Alice Munyua]], Kenya (Vice-chair)

** [[Alice Munyua]], Kenya (Vice-chair)

** [[Maria Häll]], Sweden (Vice-chair)

** [[Maria Häll]], Sweden (Vice-chair)

** [[Choon-Sai Lim]], Singapore (Vice-chair)

** [[Choon-Sai Lim]], Singapore (Vice-chair)

* GAC has its own GAC Secretariat

* Its GAC Secretariat

* GAC organizes at least three meetings on a yearly basis which are held in conjunction with ICANN's meetings.

* Its organization at least three meetings on a yearly basis which are held in conjunction with ICANN's meetings.

The GAC creates different Working Groups to study and address each issue; for instance there was a different working group for [[IDN]]s than that used for [[ccTLD]]s.<ref>[http://www.aptld.org/dubaiJune2007/04%20JK%20-%20APTLD%20meeting%20June%202007.pdf GAC working groups]</ref>

The GAC creates different Working Groups to study and address each issue; for instance, there was a different working group for [[IDN]]s than the one for [[ccTLD]]s.<ref>[http://www.aptld.org/dubaiJune2007/04%20JK%20-%20APTLD%20meeting%20June%202007.pdf GAC working groups], apTLD.org. Published June 2007.</ref>

===Related Bodies===

===Related Bodies===

* Setting up the principles for [[ccTLD]] management and delegation;

* Setting up the principles for [[ccTLD]] management and delegation;

* Setting up the principles for public policy for delegation, introduction, and [[gTLD]] operation;  

* Setting up the principles for public policy for delegation, introduction, and [[gTLD]] operation;  

* Setting up the principles for public policy of [[gTLD]] [[Whois]] services;<ref>[http://www.aptld.org/dubaiJune2007/04%20JK%20-%20APTLD%20meeting%20June%202007.pdf GAC accomplishments]</ref>

* Setting up the principles for public policy of [[gTLD]] [[Whois]] services;<ref>[http://www.aptld.org/dubaiJune2007/04%20JK%20-%20APTLD%20meeting%20June%202007.pdf GAC accomplishments], apTLD.org. Published 2007 June.</ref>

The GAC has been influential with regards to [[IDN]]s, as well as [[IPv4]] and [[IPv6]] best practices, and is an integral part of all ICANN decisions.

The GAC has been influential with regards to [[IDN]]s as well as best practices for [[IPv4]] and [[IPv6]], and is an integral part of all ICANN decisions.

===ATRT Final Report on GAC's Role & Interaction with the ICANN Board===

===ATRT Final Report on GAC's Role & Interaction with the ICANN Board===

The [[ATRT|Accountability and Transparency Review Team]] (ATRT) was one of the four Review Teams created by ICANN to comply with the requirements set forth by the U.S. [[DOC|Department of Commerce]] (DOC) in the '''Affirmation of Commitments.''' The primary objective of the ATRT is to evaluate ICANN's ability to perform its duties with accountability and transparency.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review Affirmation of Commitments – Reviews]</ref> ATRT is composed of volunteer members; 1 from both the [[ASO]] and [[ALAC]], 2 from the [[ccNSO]], 4 from the [[GNSO]], 4 from governments including 2 ex-officio members, the chair of the ICANN Board and 1 or 2 independent experts.  The GAC's representatives to the [[ATRT]] include [[Manal Ismail]], an ex-officio member who is the designated nominee of former GAC chairman [[Janis Karklins]] and vice-chair of RT, [[Fabio Colossanti]] from the EU and [[Xinsheng Zhang]] from China.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/composition Accountability and Transparency Review Team Composition]</ref>

The [[ATRT|Accountability and Transparency Review Team]] (ATRT) was one of the four Review Teams created by ICANN to comply with the requirements set forth by the U.S. [[DOC|Department of Commerce]] (DOC) in the '''Affirmation of Commitments.''' The primary objective of the ATRT is to evaluate ICANN's ability to perform its duties with accountability and transparency.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review Affirmation of Commitments – Reviews], ICANN.org.</ref> ATRT is composed of volunteer members; 1 from both the [[ASO]] and [[ALAC]], 2 from the [[ccNSO]], 4 from the [[GNSO]], 4 from governments including 2 ex-officio members, the chair of the ICANN Board and 1 or 2 independent experts.  The GAC's representatives to the [[ATRT]] include [[Manal Ismail]], an ex-officio member who is the designated nominee of former GAC chairman [[Janis Karklins]] and vice-chair of RT, [[Fabio Colossanti]] from the EU and [[Xinsheng Zhang]] from China.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/composition Accountability and Transparency Review Team Composition], ICANN.org.</ref>

On December 31, 2010, the ATRT submitted its Final Report to the [[ICANN Board]] with 27 recommendations. The final report identified four areas to improve ICANN's accountability and transparency:<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2010/12/31/atrt-final-report#concern Final Recommendations of the Accountability and Transparency Review Team]</ref>

On December 31, 2010, the ATRT submitted its Final Report to the [[ICANN Board]] with 27 recommendations. The final report identified four areas to improve ICANN's accountability and transparency:<ref name="finalrecs">[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2010/12/31/atrt-final-report#concern Final Recommendations of the Accountability and Transparency Review Team], Dot-Nxt.com. Published 2010 December 31.</ref>

* Board governance, performance, and composition  

* Board governance, performance, and composition  

* The GAC's role, effectiveness and Interaction with the Board

* The GAC's role, effectiveness and Interaction with the Board

* Review mechanisms for Board decisions

* Review mechanisms for Board decisions

Regarding the GAC's role, effectiveness and interaction with the Board, the ATRT recommended the following:<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2010/12/31/atrt-final-report#concern Final Recommendations of the Accountability and Transparency Review Team]</ref>

Regarding the GAC's role, effectiveness and interaction with the Board, the ATRT recommended the following:<ref name="finalrecs"></ref>

* The GAC-Board Joint Working Group needs to clarify what constitutes GAC public policy "advice" under the Bylaws by March, 2011.

* The GAC-Board Joint Working Group needs to clarify what constitutes GAC public policy "advice" under the Bylaws by March 2011.

* After establishing the formal context of GAC public policy "advice," the ICANN Board should develop a more formal documented process to notify and request for GAC advice regarding public policy issues by March, 2011. The ATRT recommended for ICANN to be proactive in requesting GAC advice in writing. In addition, the team also recommended the development of a database to document every request and all advice received by ICANN from the GAC.

* After establishing the formal context of GAC public policy "advice," the ICANN Board should develop a more formal documented process to notify and request for GAC advice regarding public policy issues by March 2011. The ATRT recommended for ICANN to be proactive in requesting GAC advice in writing. In addition, the team also recommended the development of a database to document every request and all advice received by ICANN from the GAC.

* The Board and GAC should work together to ensure that GAC advice is provided and considered on time.The  ATRT also suggested the creation of an independent review joint working group and a formal documentation process on how ICANN responds to GAC advice by March, 2011. The process must require ICANN to provide specific information in a timely manner regarding its position, whether it agrees or disagrees with GAC advice, and for both parties to find mutually acceptable solutions in good faith. The Board and GAC must also establish strategies to ensure that relevant provisions in the Bylaws are met.

* The Board and GAC should work together to ensure that GAC advice is provided and considered on time.The  ATRT also suggested the creation of an independent review joint working group and a formal documentation process on how ICANN responds to GAC advice by March, 2011. The process must require ICANN to provide specific information in a timely manner regarding its position, whether it agrees or disagrees with GAC advice, and for both parties to find mutually acceptable solutions in good faith. The Board and GAC must also establish strategies to ensure that relevant provisions in the Bylaws are met.

* The Board should develop and implement mechanisms to engage the GAC earlier in the policy development process.

* The Board should develop and implement mechanisms to engage the GAC earlier in the policy development process.

===ICANN 43, GAC-GNSO Joint Meeting===

===ICANN 43, GAC-GNSO Joint Meeting===

In March, 2012, the GAC had a joint meeting with the [[GNSO]] regarding the plan to extend special domain name protections for the Red Cross and the International Olympic Committee, the ongoing amendment negotiations to the [[Registrar Accreditation Agreement]], and the Human Rights Council discussion on the freedom of expression over the internet. The GAC informed the GNSO that it supports the extension of domain name protections for the Red Cross and the Olympics but that it is not a consensus view. The Committee supported the issue on freedom of expression over the internet and acknowledge the progress of the RAA and requested a timelime.<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/icann43/sun/gnso-gac GAC-GNSO Joint Meeting]</ref>

In March, 2012, the GAC had a joint meeting with the [[GNSO]] regarding the plan to extend special domain name protections for the Red Cross and the International Olympic Committee, the ongoing amendment negotiations to the [[Registrar Accreditation Agreement]], and the Human Rights Council discussion on the freedom of expression over the internet. The GAC informed the GNSO that it supports the extension of domain name protections for the Red Cross and the Olympics but that it is not a consensus view. The Committee supported the issue on freedom of expression over the internet and acknowledge the progress of the RAA and requested a timelime.<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/icann43/sun/gnso-gac GAC-GNSO Joint Meeting]</ref>

===ICANN 44===

===ICANN 44===

In September, 2012, a working group related to the [[European Commission]] sent a letter to [[ICANN]] warning that its proposed additions to the [[RAA|Registrar Accreditation Agreement]] would infringe on European Privacy laws. The issues in question are the proposals to make registrars retain data about their customers for up to two years after registration, and by the idea that registrars should re-verify contact data every year. These proposals were discussed and supported by the GAC and the law enforcement voices within ICANN at [[ICANN 44]] in Prague. This is potentially conflicting given that the GAC supported these measures and this pan-European body is coming down against it.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10606-european-privacy-watchdog-says-icanns-whois-demands-are-unlawful European Privacy Watchdog Says ICANNs WhoisDemands Are Unlawful, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

In September, 2012, a working group related to the [[European Commission]] sent a letter to [[ICANN]] warning that its proposed additions to the [[RAA|Registrar Accreditation Agreement]] would infringe on European Privacy laws. The issues in question are the proposals to make registrars retain data about their customers for up to two years after registration, and by the idea that registrars should re-verify contact data every year. These proposals were discussed and supported by the GAC and the law enforcement voices within ICANN at [[ICANN 44]] in Prague. This is potentially conflicting given that the GAC supported these measures and this pan-European body is coming down against it.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10606-european-privacy-watchdog-says-icanns-whois-demands-are-unlawful European Privacy Watchdog Says ICANNs WhoisDemands Are Unlawful, DomainIncite.com]</ref>