ICANN Announcements

Read ICANN Announcements to stay informed of the latest policymaking activities, regional events, and more.

Summary of Public Experts Group Meeting October 14, 2014

16 October 2014

In addition to the U.N. six languages, this content is also available in

[Audio of the full meeting is available online here.]

On October 14, 2014, the Public Experts Group (PEG) met to discuss evaluation criteria for the selection of Advisors to the Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) in the ICANN Accountability Process. The PEG members, Jeanette Hofmann, Janis Karklins, Larry Strickling and Brian Cute, discussed and agreed to the areas of expertise and evaluation criteria they would use in the selection process. The PEG agreed it was important to ensure that certain areas of expertise are brought into the work of the CCWG and that it should focus on areas of expertise that complement expertise brought by the Community participants in the CCWG.

As such, the PEG identified the following areas of expertise:


Board Governance and Corporate Management (for example operational, finance, risk management)

Global Accountability and Transparency – theoretical, practical, tools and metrics

Global Ethics Frameworks and Human Rights (for example consumer protection)

Governmental Engagement and Relations and Multistakeholder Governance

International Law/ Jurisprudence (for example choice of law)


A broader list of areas of expertise had been made available to the PEG for consideration. There were certain areas of expertise that are readily available in the ICANN Community (for example, Internet Technical Operations). The PEG believes that it need not duplicate expertise such as this through the appointment of Advisors. After agreeing to these areas of expertise, the PEG began to review the list of candidates presented to conduct and initial screening. We note that some candidates were put forward or are well-connected to existing ICANN Community structures. Since the Advisors will play a purely advisory role in the process, and whereas these candidates may be able to participate more fully in the CCWG, the PEG recommends that these candidates avail themselves of the Community-based mechanism for participation in the CCWG.

The PEG will also consider the need for diversity (for example, geographic, gender) in the Advisors when evaluating candidates. The PEG will review the biographic materials presented by candidates and will conduct its own research as well. The PEG anticipates that it will complete its work by the end of October.