On Monday 18th March I had the privilege of listening to Professor John Uff QC talk about engineering ethics. He is a civil engineer with a specialty in geotechnics, an Emeritus Professor of Engineering Law at King’s College, London, a global authority on construction law and a Queen’s Counsel. He has served as Vice President of the London Court of International Arbitration and as President of the Society of Construction Arbitrators. I cannot think of many who are as well qualified to discuss this issue! My interest was sparked because I have been asked to comment on ethical issues from time to time. The whole concept of fairness must ultimately be based on ethical considerations, which for professionals, are often described in codes. Professor Uff was invited to address the New Zealand Institute of Professional Engineers, who extended the invitation to lawyers and members of the Arbitrators and Mediators Institute.
The reason Professor Uff was invited was the discussion of ethical duties of engineers arising from the 2 major disasters in New Zealand, relating to engineering failure. The 1st was the Christchurch earthquake and subsequent after-shocks, and the 2nd was the Pike River coal mine explosion. The fact this has caused the New Zealand engineers to reappraise the duties which engineers owed to the public as expressed in their code of ethics, and Professor Uff has written extensively on the subject.
At ICANN we do not have a formal code of ethics for the operation of the domain name system. There are a number of elements however which collectively are the start of such code. The very creation of ICANN as a not-for-profit multi-stakeholder organisation separates it from purely commercial enterprises. The existence of the office of the ombudsman to deal with issues of fairness, delay and diversity does make ICANN different, and the Ombudsman have also adopted the standards of practice for online dispute resolution. Frank Fowlie also developed the statement for respectful communication. ICANN also has similar guidelines within the communities which make up ICANN. More recently, ICANN has proposed a new draft of Registrants’ Rights and Responsibilities, which is akin to a code of ethics. I have suggested the Ombudsman should have a specific role in this code. Professor Uff did warn the meeting however, that we should not create codes of ethics as a reaction to a problem or in the case of the engineering disasters, as a response to such major calamities. Fortunately at ICANN there has not been a significant issue, except of course this draft was developed because of the new GTLD program. This is different from the engineering code issues, but is analogous because it is a reaction to the event. I am hoping there will be some debate, at Beijing and further, on the use of such a code and perhaps a wider debate.