[CCWG-ACCT] draft language for certification to lawyers on HR question

[Niels ten Oever]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

If you would permit me, I have a small process question:

The proposed text on human rights in the CCWG report has already been
reviewed by lawyers (at the time it was prepared by WP4). Were these
the same lawyers that will answer the proposed question underneath? If
so, have they not checked for these risks the last time? If so, this
could save us some time.

Best,

Niels

On 01/06/2016 02:41 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end
> of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the
> language:
> 
> 
> ***
> 
> In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has 
> raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the
> bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk
> of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
> 
> We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief
> assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the
> risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a
> vis the current situation (taking into account the existing
> obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation),
> and if so, how such risk could be mitigated.
> 
> ***
> 
> Best,
> 
> Niels
> 
> 
> 
> On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
>> All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find
>> below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers
>> with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s
>> concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC
>> tomorrow.
> 
>> *** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed 
>> inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights 
>> might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal 
>> claims or even law suits.
> 
>> We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief 
>> assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It
>> is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly
>> referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate
>> whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be
>> added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a
>> new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
> 
>> Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
> 
> 
> 
>> _______________________________________________ 
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org 
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org 
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
> 
- -- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRvcAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpiL4H/08f9uvS7Re/f6pxH06Hbjei
aWAXLigeqlsKdYJQGPRhe5hOYpvw48huNC6ed6wbfjHgqPbHyHzAjThsGu4z5GB5
5NQYufmBtjvgs2j2n6MiwJFQx1cQVv54gwe6tPTWG1G1qZGc9uat2eFY4G609lSi
DImT1FTnuGcTOuNdEX6sWJsx+IAcgKLYbs9yXUzAHeUIX0WeKFdbwxBMbvMHpfVX
0XZvfz9t8QPUD7hhaApWio34NV9h9nTw17/F4kg0oNlZLT4l7RTxSH4vgTI7RD5Y
yNa/RZriZAOhEyODuyjpsCbjetg/kReol9RGEHKt5LO079HwTZN4LO4TvTd/qKQ=
=vdV0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----