[tankenmate]

Actually gTLDs are restricted by their contract with ICANN (registry agreement (RA), search google for "ICANN RA"). ccTLDs however merely give lip service to domain registration norms, but as there is no contract beyond "this registry is yours to run" ccTLDs have far more leeway (public pressure sometimes withstanding) to do as they please. It is for reasons similar to this that a fair number of ccTLDs don't run EPP for example (running an EPP service is a requirement in the gTLD contract).

EDIT: further explanation of the gTLD registry agreement

[oarsinsync]

In the context of accidental domain loss / attempted hijacking, absolutely agree on all of your points.

In the case of "entities with enough power and influence", I don't think any of the ICANN RA requirements make gTLDs any less likely to being seized than any ccTLDs.

[ValentineC]

I'm sceptical of ccTLDs mostly because of how the Libyan government killed a domain shortener for linking to porn sites in 2010: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/oct/08/bitly-lib...

Heck, I own a .sg domain, and I don't trust the Singapore government to not overreact if I published anything politically sensitive on it.