[CCWG-ACCT] ICANN Board comments on Recommendation 6

Wed Jan 27 05:08:55 UTC 2016

A few quick and non-excessive comments:

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Chris Disspain <ceo at auda.org.au> wrote:

> Mathieu, All,
>
> Leaving aside any discussion on the principle of putting this in as a
> by-law, the draft text (which I understand to be actual proposed by-law
> text)
>

I'm (still) unclear on what might be meant by "actual proposed by-law
text".  Have our counsel approved this as usable text, or will this be
subject to further drafting by counsel?

> below seems to me to be deficient.
>
> This Bylaw
> provision will not enter into force until a Framework of Interpretation is
> developed as part of “Work Stream 2” by the CCWG-Accountability or another
> Cross Community Working Group chartered for such purpose by one or more
> Supporting Organizations or Advisory Committees. ICANN shall support the
> establishment and work of such a Group to facilitate development of the
> Framework of Interpretation as promptly as possible.
>
>
> Any such framework needs to the approved not just developed.
>

Agree, but this is merely a drafting point. We should also clarify who the
approver(s) is/are.  Is it the Chartering Organizations or is it the Board

>
>
> It would not be sufficient for such a development to occur in a group
> chartered by one or more of the SOs and ACs. Such a group would need to be
> chartered in the same way as the they CCWG.
>

This should be a broadly chartered WG.  A single SO or AC would not be
sufficient.  That said, it should not be a requirement that all of the CCWG
chartering organizations have to charter this group too.

(And of course there is always the option of continuing the work in the
CCWG/WS2.)

>
> In other words, precisely the same ‘rules’ for other WS2 matters would
> need to apply to this. Is that correct?
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer
>
> .au Domain Administration Ltd
>
> T: +61 3 8341 4111 | F: +61 3 8341 4112
>
> E: ceo at auda.org.au | W: www.auda.org.au
>
> auDA – Australia’s Domain Name Administrator
>
>
> *Important Notice* *- *This email may contain information which is
> confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use
> of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you
> must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received
> this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message
> immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
> On 27 Jan 2016, at 08:06 , Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
>
> Thank you Bruce,
>
> For the benefit of the Board members as well as colleagues who did not
> attend the call, a short summary from our conclusions today based on the
> meeting notes. This conclusion was achieved after closely listening to the
> Board's concerns raised in the 3rd public comment, and assessing various
> alternate proposals during our 3 plenary working sessions.
>
> Action item is now for staff and lawyers to move to finalizing
> recommendation consistent with the proposal discussed and comments
> expressed during the session -(such as Alan). No further plenary
> discussion is planned unless, as suggested by Kavouss, the Board would
> come back with a concrete action or resolution that would convince the
> group to proceed otherwise.
>
> And the proposed text during the session was :
> <quote>Within its Mission and in its operations, ICANN will respect
> internationally recognized Human Rights. This commitment shall  not in any
> way create an obligation for ICANN, or any entity having a relationship
> with ICANN, to protect or enforce Human Rights beyond what may be required
> by applicable law. In particular, this does not create any additional
> obligation for ICANN to respond to or consider any complaint, request, or
> demand seeking the enforcement of Human Rights by ICANN. This Bylaw
> provision will not enter into force until a Framework of Interpretation is
> developed as part of “Work Stream 2” by the CCWG-Accountability or another
> Cross Community Working Group chartered for such purpose by one or more
> Supporting Organizations or Advisory Committees. ICANN shall  support the
> establishment and work of such a Group to facilitate development of the
> Framework of Interpretation as promptly as possible.</>
>
> Best regards,
> Mathieu
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] De la part de
> Bruce Tonkin
> Envoyé : mardi 26 janvier 2016 21:17
> À : CCWG Accountability
> Objet : [CCWG-ACCT] ICANN Board comments on Recommendation 6
> Importance : Haute
>
> Hello All,
>
> Markus gave a verbal summary of the current position of the Board
> following our Board call yesterday during the CCWG call.   I have set out
> the current position in writing below.
>
> I recognize that the CCWG members did not accept the Board's position.
> There are quite a few Board members on the call - and we can take this
> discussion back to the Board to see if we can find another solution.
>
>
> (1) The Board is committed to upholding human rights as appropriate within
> ICANN's mission; and
>
> (2) The Board  intends to work alongside the community to progress the
> human rights work within ICANN, including through the development of a
> Human Rights Statement to reach a meaningful framework to guide human
> rights considerations within ICANN's mission.
>
> The Board still remains supportive of Option B, or allowing the WS2 effort
> on defining a framework to proceed prior to considering whether to include
> a human rights obligation in the Bylaws.
>
> The Board understands that one of the reasons for the suggestion of a
> "dormant" bylaw text (which the Board remains concerned about for the
> reasons flagged earlier) is that there is concern among the community that
> if a reference to human rights is not included in the Bylaws, the Board
> will not follow through on a community wish to address this issue.  To
> address this concern, the Board proposes that including in the Bylaws a
> requirement for ICANN to address the human rights issue, as well as a
> requirement to consider - after a framework is concluded - how that should
> be referenced in the Bylaws.  The Board therefore proposes the following:
>
> In the Bylaws text referencing WS2, language should be included that
> specifically identifies that a recommended framework on human rights
> within ICANN is expected to be part of the WS2 effort.  Further, the
> Bylaws on WS2 should specify that If the cross-community group developing
> the framework also makes a consensus recommendation on whether and how
> that framework can be reflected in the ICANN Bylaws, the ICANN Board must
> consider that recommendation according to the process defined for
> considering those continuous improvement recommendations.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bruce Tonkin
>
> ICANN Board liaison to the CCWG
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160127/14d05adc/attachment-0001.html>