[CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: Human Rights Transition Provision: Bylaws Section 27.3(a)

Kavouss Arasteh kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Mon May 2 08:49:54 UTC 2016


Dear Colleagues
There is a need to explicitly reference the requirement of being approved
by Chartering Organizations.
Implicit reference could give rise to misinterpretation and /or misuse of
the provisions
Kavouss

2016-05-02 10:44 GMT+02:00 Dr. Tatiana Tropina <t.tropina at mpicc.de>:

> Hi Tijani,
> I think that the reference to "consensus recommendation in Work Stream 2"
> and the reference to the same process as in Work Stream one in the proposed
> bylaw language does, in fact, mean the approval of chartering organisations.
> Furthermore, when we were agreeing on the HR bylaw language, the main idea
> was that the FOI will follow the same process as WS1, so the initial
> reference to CO's approval was supposed to serve this purpose. Thus, the
> new language, in my opinion, is fine, clear and fully in line with the
> intent of the report
> Other than that, +1 to Greg and Niels for all the points.
> Best regards
> Tatiana
>
> On 02/05/16 10:22, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
>
> Hi Niels,
>
> The last modification of the bylaws proposed by the lawyers didn’t make
> any reference to the chartering organizations approval while it is
> clearly mentioned in the CCWG last proposal ratified by the chartering
> organizations.
>
> Have a nice day
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Tijani BEN JEMAA*
> Executive Director
> Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)
> Phone: +216 98 330 114
>              +216 52 385 114
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Le 2 mai 2016 à 09:11, Niels ten Oever <lists at nielstenoever.net> a écrit :
>
> Dear Tijani and Kavouss,
>
> Could you please indicate where the proposed text is not consistent with
> the report? Concrete references would be helpful for me to better
> understand your point.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Niels
>
>
>
> On 05/02/2016 09:38 AM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>
> Tijani +1
> I fully agree with Tijani
> People misuse the opportunity to make modifications that were not agreed
> during the lkast 16 months
> NO CHANGE NO MODIFICATIONS.
> During the WSIS I WILL tell everybody that there is no supervision nor
> control on what we have agreed and the people will make whatever change
> they wish without the agreements of the others
>
> KAVOUSS
>
> 2016-05-02 8:14 GMT+02:00 Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn
> <mailto:tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn <tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn>>>:
>
>    Mathieu and all,
>
>    The modification proposed doesn’t reflect the CCWG last proposal
>    approved by the chartering organization. I don’t think we are
>    allowed to write bylaws that are not the exact interpretation of the
>    approved document that had the CCWG consensus and the charting
>    organizations ratification.
>
>
>    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    *Tijani BEN JEMAA*
>    Executive Director
>    Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)
>    Phone: +216 98 330 114
>                +216 52 385 114
>
>    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>    Le 2 mai 2016 à 04:23, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
>    <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>> a
> écrit :
>
>    Mathieu,
>    Tks
>    Pls NOTE MY SERIOUS OBJECTIONS to:
>    1.NOT MENTIONING REFERNCE TO THE APPROVAL OF CHARTERING
>    ORGANIZATIONBS in HR
>    2. GIVE GIVE A BLANKET AGREEMENT TO THE DOCUMENTS WHICH YET TO BE
>    DRAFTED.
>    3. Making so many changes to the Third proposals . We must avoid
>    having a new proposal
>    Kavouss
>
>
>    2016-05-01 22:42 GMT+02:00 Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
>    <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>>:
>
>        Dear colleagues,
>
>        Please find below for your consideration some suggestions from
>        our lawyers for clarification of the bylaw language regarding
>        the Human rights FoI. This follows our request during the
>        previous call.
>
>        Best,
>
>        Mathieu Weill
>        ---------------
>        Depuis mon mobile, désolé pour le style
>
>        Début du message transféré :
>
>        *Expéditeur:* "Gregory, Holly" <holly.gregory at sidley.com
>        <mailto:holly.gregory at sidley.com <holly.gregory at sidley.com>>>
>        *Date:* 1 mai 2016 19:10:53 UTC+2
>        *Destinataire:* "'Mathieu Weill'" <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
>        <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>>,
> "'Thomas Rickert'"
>        <thomas at rickert.net <mailto:thomas at rickert.net <thomas at rickert.net>>>,
> León Felipe
>        Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx
>        <mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>>>, "
> bylaws-coord at icann.org
>        <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org <bylaws-coord at icann.org>>" <
> bylaws-coord at icann.org
>        <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org <bylaws-coord at icann.org>>>
>        *Cc:* ACCT-Staff <acct-staff at icann.org
>        <mailto:acct-staff at icann.org <acct-staff at icann.org>>>, "Rosemary
> E. Fei"
>        <rfei at adlercolvin.com <mailto:rfei at adlercolvin.com
> <rfei at adlercolvin.com>>>,
>        "ICANN at adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN at adlercolvin.com
> <ICANN at adlercolvin.com>>"
>        <ICANN at adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN at adlercolvin.com
> <ICANN at adlercolvin.com>>>,
>        Sidley ICANN CCWG <sidleyicannccwg at sidley.com
>        <mailto:sidleyicannccwg at sidley.com <sidleyicannccwg at sidley.com>>>,
>        "Samantha.Eisner at icann.org
>        <mailto:Samantha.Eisner at icann.org <Samantha.Eisner at icann.org>>"
>        <Samantha.Eisner at icann.org <mailto:Samantha.Eisner at icann.org
> <Samantha.Eisner at icann.org>>>
>        *Objet:* *Human Rights Transition Provision:  Bylaws Section
>        27.3(a)*
>
>
>        Dear Co-Chairs and Bylaws Coordinating Group:
>
>        On the CCWG call last week, there was a discussion of the
>        Bylaws language regarding the transition provision on Human
>        Rights*//*[27.3(a)] and it was suggested that the language be
>        clarified to ensure that the same approval process used for
>        Work Stream 1 would apply.  We propose the following
>        clarifying edits.  We suggest that you share this with the
>        CCWG and if there is agreement, the following proposed edit
>        should be included in the CCWG’s public comment:____
>
>        Redline:____
>
>        *Section 27.3. HUMAN RIGHTS____*
>
>        __ __
>
>        (a) The Core Value set forth in Section 1.2(b)(viii) shall
>        have no force or effect unless and until a framework of
>        interpretation for human rights (“*FOI-HR*”) is approved by
>        (i) approved for submission to the Board by the
>        CCWG-Accountability as a consensus recommendation in Work
>        Stream 2, and (ii) approved by each of the
>        CCWG-Accountability’s chartering organizations and (iii) the
>        Board, (in each thecase of the Board, using the same process
>        and criteria used by the Boardto consider the as for Work
>        Stream 1 Recommendations).____
>
>        __ __
>
>        (b) No person or entity shall be entitled to invoke the
>        reconsideration process provided in Section 4.2, or the
>        independent review process provided in Section 4.3, based
>        solely on the inclusion of the Core Value set forth in
>        Section 1.2(b)(viii) (i) until after the FOI-HR contemplated
>        by Section 27.3(a) is in place or (ii) for actions of ICANN
>        or the Board that occurred prior to the____
>
>        effectiveness of the FOI-HR.____
>
>        Clean:____
>
>        *Section 27.3. HUMAN RIGHTS____*
>
>        __ __
>
>        (a) The Core Value set forth in Section 1.2(b)(viii) shall
>        have no force or effect unless and until a framework of
>        interpretation for human rights (“*FOI-HR*”) is (i) approved
>        for submission to the Board by the CCWG-Accountability as a
>        consensus recommendation in Work Stream 2 and (ii) approved
>        by the Board, in each case, using the same process and
>        criteria as for Work Stream 1 Recommendations.____
>
>        __ __
>
>        (b) No person or entity shall be entitled to invoke the
>        reconsideration process provided in Section 4.2, or the
>        independent review process provided in Section 4.3, based
>        solely on the inclusion of the Core Value set forth in
>        Section 1.2(b)(viii) (i) until after the FOI-HR contemplated
>        by Section 27.3(a) is in place or (ii) for actions of ICANN
>        or the Board that occurred prior to the____
>
>        effectiveness of the FOI-HR.____
>
>        Kind regards, ____
>
>        __ __
>
>        Holly and Rosemary____
>
>        __ __
>
>        __ __
>
>        *HOLLY* *J. GREGORY*
>        Partner and Co-Chair
>        Corporate Governance & Executive Compensation Practice Group____
>
>        *Sidley Austin LLP*
>        787 Seventh Avenue
>        New York, NY 10019
>        +1 212 839 5853
>        holly.gregory at sidley.com <mailto:holly.gregory at sidley.com
> <holly.gregory at sidley.com>>
>        www.sidley.com <http://www.sidley.com/>____
>
>        http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png
>        <http://www.sidley.com/> *SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP*____
>
>        __ __
>
>
>
>
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
>        This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information
>        that is privileged or confidential.
>        If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the
>        e-mail and any attachments and notify us
>        immediately.
>
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
>
>
>        _______________________________________________
>        Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>        Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>        <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <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
>    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <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
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing listAccountability-Cross-Community at icann.orghttps://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/20160502/3276eeb8/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list