Independent Review Process

Independent Review Panel (IRP) is a third-party review of Board actions operated by an international arbitration provider appointed. The IRP id in-charge in evaluating and determining if the actions, in-actions, decisions or resolutions made by the ICANN Board are contrary to the provisions of the Corporations Articles of Incorporation and/or By-Laws. An IRP is created whenever there is an allegation against the Board and the complainant requests for an independent review of the action or decision. Article 3, Section IV (Independent Review of Actions) of the ICANN Bylaws mandates the creation of an IRP, which is carried out by Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers through its Independent Review Policy established in 2002.

Background

The development of the Internet Review Policy began on March 1999. The initial ICANN Board appointed a 10-member Advisory Committee on Independent Review in-charge in developing the principles that will serve as structure for the implementation of independent review procedures in compliance with the ICANN Bylaws. On May 7, 1999, the Advisory Committee submitted its interim report with draft principles and addendum for public review and comment. The documents were publicly discussed during the ICANN meetings held in Berlin on May 26-17, 1999. After deliberations, the ICANN Board accepted the draft principles and the Advisory Committee were instructed to complete its task.

On August 6, 1999, the Advisory Committee submitted the Final Report: Principles for Independent Review. The ICANN Board introduced the document for public discussion and accepted it during its meeting in Santiago on August 25-26, 1999.

During the ICANN Meeting in Cairo on March 9-10 2000, the ICANN Staff submitted the proposed Independent Review Policy. The policy serves as a guideline on how to implement the principles recommended by the Advisory Committee. The policy was adopted by the ICANN Board on March 10. An Independent Review Panel Nominating Committee was delegated to nominate 9 members who will comprise the IRP.

On May 7, 2001, the IRP Nominating Committee received an instruction from the Board to seek qualified applicants who will assume the position as members of the IRP within 90 days. Following the directive, the IRP Nominating Committee issued a call to the internet community to submit nominations on June 26, 2001. The IRP Nominating Committee was unsuccessful in completing the list of candidates for the IRP Panel on the deadline set by the ICANN Board and requested for an extension. During the ICANN Meeting in Montevideo, the Board approved the request of the IRP Nominating Committee and extended the deadline to submit the list of the candidates for the IRP until October 15, 2001. The IRP Nominating Committee was not able to provide a complete list during the extended deadline. Only three members of the committee submitted a list of 9 nominees while the other members did not participate in the process. A report on the status of the committee was submitted during the ICANN Meeting in Accra, Ghana on March 14, 2002. The nine individuals nominated for the IRP Panel include:

1. Zoe Baird (US)
2. Diane Cabell (US)
3. Scott Donahey(US)
4. David Post (US)
5. Michael Kirby (AU)
6. Houston Putnam Lowry]] (US)
7. Margit Brandl (AT)
8. Henry Perritt (US)
9. Zheng Chengsi (CN)

On March 14, 2002, the challenge and difficulties faced by the IRP Nominating Committee was referred to Evolution and Reform Committee then chaired by Alejandro Pisanty with Lyman Chapin, Phil Davidson, Hans Kraaijenbrink, and Nii Quaynor serving as members. The Reform and Evolution Committee was created by the ICANN Board through Resoultion )1:32 to develop a framework for the implementation of reforms on ICANN's structure and procedures. ICANN adopted its new Bylaws o December 15, 2002. Artcle IV Section 3 of the Bylaws mandates an independent review process without the involvement of an IRP nominating Committee.

Members of the IRP Nominating Committee

The initial members of the IRP Nominating Committee include:

• Tim Berners-Lee
• Scott Hemphill
• Olivier Iteanu
• Ching-Yi Liu
• Joon Kook Park
• Houlin Zhao

Independent Review of Board Actions

Under Article IV Section 3 of the ICANN Bylaws, the internet governing body is mandated to develop a separate process for third-party review of Board actions in the event of accusations that the Board decided in contrast with the organizations Bylaws. Complainants are required to submit a request for an independent review of the action or decision. An Independent Review Panel operated by an international dispute resolution provider will handle the case and determine the merit of the accusations whether ICANN violated its Bylaws in conjunction with the contested action. The selected IRP is required to submit its operating rules and procedures to the ICANN Board for approval. A three-member IRP is allowed as per request of either party. If there is no request for a three-member panel, the dispute will be resolved by a one-member panel. Members of the IRP must follow the conflict of interest policy as stated in the IRP provider's operating rules and procedures.

Manwin Request for IRP

Manwin Licensing International, the owner of numerous licenses and trademarks for adult oriented domain names such as YouPorn and xTube filed a request for an Independent Review Panel on November 16, 2011. The company claimed that the ICANN Board fall short in addressing important issues such as competition, consumer protection, malicious abuse and rights protection prior in connection with its approval of the .xxx TLD in favor of ICM Registry. In addition, Manwin alleged that ICANN failed to compel ICM to follow its registry contract and allowed the company to engage in anti-competitive practice and violate IP rights.