[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ICANN-EU] USG's ultimate control, transition roadmap
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: [ICANN-EU] USG's ultimate control, transition roadmap
- From: "Roberto Gaetano" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 23:27:02 CEST
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- Sender: email@example.com
I object to your point 1)
>1) There is /no/ clear legal basis for international organizations with a
>role. (By 'statutory role' I mean those that governments allow to regulate
>things - as opposed to pressure groups like, say, Friends of the Earth).
>current international regulatory environment is a hotch-potch of different
>which have grown piecemeal from diplomatic and commercial initiatives over
>years. Some are mainly fora for national governments (e.g. the UN and the
>some are effectively run by the commercial & public operators in an
>sector (e.g. the ITU) and some appear to have no particular legitimizing
>(e.g. the WIPO) but are successful both because they fulfil a useful role
>economic actors in a sector, and a useful regulatory role for governments.
The legal basis for the organizations you mention (UN, WTO, ITU, WIPO) is
the international treaty that the member countries have signed.
But this, and here I do agree with you, by no means applies to ICANN.
For the record, the idea of creating a new "ad hoc" international treaty
organization was proposed in the past, but has been abandoned.
USG, to name one, was strongly opposed to this - I wonder why ;>).
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at