Governmental Advisory Committee

From ICANNWiki
Revision as of 14:24, 23 October 2012 by Andrew (talk | contribs) (→‎ICANN 45)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is neutral, but is sponsored by
.pw The Professional Web, a new TLD
for professionals and businesses.
You can learn more about their services here
PW-LOGO-1.png
ICANNWiki Silver Sponsor

GAC is the acronym for the Governmental Advisory Committee, which is a formal advisory body providing important feedback and input for ICANN regarding its public policy.[1]

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.

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.[2]

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 is constantly looking for new members, especially from developing countries in order to increase global awareness, increase participation, and make sure that ICANN reflects global diversity.

GAC Structure

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:
  • GAC has its own GAC Secretariat
  • GAC organizes 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 IDNs than that used for ccTLDs.[3]

Related Bodies

Other such advisory committees which are important for ICANN are:

GAC Achievements, Comments, and Advice

Over the years, GAC is proud of accomplishing the following:

  • 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 of gTLD Whois services;[4]

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

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

The 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. 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.[5] 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.[6]

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:[7]

  • Board governance, performance, and composition
  • The GAC's role, effectiveness and Interaction with the Board
  • Public input and policy development processes
  • Review mechanisms for Board decisions

Regarding the GAC's role, effectiveness and interaction with the Board, the ATRT recommended the following:[8]

  • 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.
  • 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 and GAC should work together to create and implement actions to ensure that GAC is well informed regarding ICANN's policy agenda. Both parties should also consider creating/evaluating the role and necessary skills of the ICANN Support Staff to ensure that effective communication is provided.
  • The Board is encouraged to increase the level of support and commitment to the GAC process by: encouraging member countries, particularly developing countries, to participate in GAC deliberations; providing multilingual access to ICANN records; and developing a process to identify how and when ICANN deals with senior government officials on public policy issues on a regular or collective basis to compliment the GAC process.

GAC Advice on the .xxx sTLD

On March 17, 2011, the GAC, via its Chairman Heather Dryden, reiterated to ICANN Chairman Peter Dengate Thrush that the Committee has no active support for the implementation of the .xxx sTLD. The GAC also informed ICANN that some governments might prevent access to the TLD, which could harm the global interoperability and stability of the internet. Furthermore, the Committee also pointed out the possibility that ICANN may have to assume a management and oversight role regarding .xxx content.[9] Despite GAC's position, the ICANN Board approved the .xxx sTLD during the ICANN 41 Meeting in San Francisco, on March 18, 2011.[10] The disregard for the GAC's advice in this instance provided for a number of other international entities to question ICANN's ability to successfully manage the DNS.

New gTLDs

On January 11, 2012, the ninth version of the Applicant Guidebook was released one day prior to the opening window of ICANN's new gTLD program. The new version gave greater power to the GAC in forcing the ICANN Board to manually review any application that the committee found problematic. Exactly how many GAC members it would take to cause this review is vague, but it could be as little as one nation's objection. This is a significant change given that the ICANN Board had no requirement to heed any GAC objection in the previous guidebook; the board is still able to overrule any GAC objection.[11]

GAC Participation at ICANN

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.[12]

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 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.[13]

ICANN 45

As opposed to holding its general meetings with other supporting organizations and advisory committees within ICANN, the GAC has created more personal meeting time. This was done in an attempt to coordinate all of its GAC Early Warnings related to ICANN's gTLD expansion program. They will hold a meeting with the heads of other advisory bodies rather than the entire groups.[14]

At the meeting, the GAC signaled that it would not recommend to the ICANN Board to extensively reserve Intergovernmental Organizations' names on new gTLDs. There was some concern that the GAC would make recommendations similar to those made by the U.N. and related agencies, which call for protections of any organization on the "6ter" list of Paris maintained by WIPO, and contains 1,100 strings in total. The GAC advice calls for protections of any organization registered on the .int TLD, a little-used space for IGOs. That TLD only has 166 registrants.[15]

References