Strickling, Sepulveda Stand Behind IANA Multistakeholder Move, at Internet Governance Forum
Obama administration officials reaffirmed their commitment to the multistakeholder model’s application to the transition of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., expressed support for the multistakeholder approach, but said congressional oversight and a GAO study are necessary to clear up remaining questions about the transition’s outcome. ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) should be given a stakeholder capacity within the organization, rather than its current advisory role, said ICANN stakeholders and officials Wednesday at an Internet Governance Forum-USA event.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
NTIA “made it very clear” that any proposal suggesting IANA oversight by “a government or group of governments will not be accepted,” said NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling. The suggestions that a “new body” be created to replace the NTIA’s accountability mechanism for ICANN are unnecessary, he said. Such a body would create a “new accountability issue,” because it’s not clear how the theoretical group would be “held accountable” itself, said Strickling.
The administration believes “the multistakeholder community can govern itself without the symbolic or actual oversight of a single stakeholder, including the U.S. government,” said Daniel Sepulveda, deputy assistant secretary of state for economic and business affairs. Sepulveda cited the Internet governance conference NETmundial (CD April 28 p13; April 24 p7; April 23 p19) as “proof” of the multistakeholder model’s success. Some “democratic” countries and “authoritarian governments” may not always agree with the multistakeholder model, but the “trend lines are encouraging,” he said. “Internet stakeholders have a proven track record to justify the continuation of an Internet governance architecture that is diffuse, inclusive to everyone and not subject to intergovernmental control.” Sepulveda referred to the multistakeholder model’s application to broader Internet governance issues.
The “pursuit” of a “private sector-led, multistakeholder approach continues to be the goal” for the IANA transition, but “any actions” taken by the administration “must ensure that oppressive regimes are not given the opportunity to bend the Internet to fit their agendas,” said Walden. The Domain Openness Through Continued Oversight Matters (DOTCOM Act), which Walden co-sponsors, isn’t a “repudiation” of the transition, nor is it a “directive for NTIA to maintain IANA oversight,” he said. HR-4342, which would delay the transition until a GAO study, passed the House as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act May 22. It’s “unreasonable” to “rubberstamp a proposal” that hasn’t been “negotiated,” said Walden.
The success of “developing a multistakeholder process” for the transition “will be measured” by how the IANA-related Coordination Group (CD July 8 p6) “reaches out to the entire global community,” said Strickling. The group’s openness and transparency, not whether it has “27 people or 37 people,” will help determine the multistakeholder model’s viability, he said, referring to the GAC’s request to have 5 slots on the group rather than the two slots originally afforded (CD June 27 p7). Strickling said the group would decide the total number of members at the first meeting in London Thursday. ICANN released the names of all 27 group members (http://bit.ly/TUDGc2) in a news release Wednesday (http://bit.ly/1t4tJ8m). The group’s two GAC members, GAC Chair Heather Dryden and GAC Vice Chair Tracy Hackshaw, were listed as “interim members,” said the ICANN document.
The GAC should be an ICANN “stakeholder,” not an “outpost,” said Becky Burr, Neustar chief privacy officer. As presently constructed, the GAC doesn’t have “skin in the game on the policies” developed by ICANN stakeholders,” she said. The GAC has an advisory capacity to the ICANN board, but doesn’t have a vote. Burr hoped the ICANN accountability review would open the door for a more “participatory” GAC within the ICANN stakeholder community. It’s “really important” that the GAC have a “concrete role” within ICANN, said Jamie Hedlund, ICANN adviser to CEO Fadi Chehade, who agreed the GAC should have a stakeholder role.
"Internet governance debates often become or descend into proxies for other political debates,” said Laura DeNardis, American University communications professor. DeNardis highlighted how concerns over former NSA contractor Edward Snowden’s surveillance leaks spilled into root zone issues. The root zone “has nothing to do with surveillance,” she said. NTIA has “done a great job” explaining that IANA shouldn’t be “politicized,” said Shane Tews, visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute’s Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy: “Politicizing the IANA functions is probably the worst thing that could happen to it.”