[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2 - 27-28 September Plenary Agenda and Materials - 1 of 2 - FoI text proposal to bridge divergences

Nigel Roberts nigel at channelisles.net
Thu Sep 28 14:25:38 UTC 2017


I would support this wholeheartedly.



On 28/09/17 13:21, Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> Further to my Email below, I would like to share with you the following 
> proposal that would constitute in my view an acceptable outcome of the 
> public consultation on the Framework of Interpretation, and build on the 
> wording proposals made by Switzerland in its public comment input (see 
> attached) and the exchanges had thereafter in the Subgroup.
> 
> Specifically, I would like to propose that the following paragraph on 
> page 6 (under “internationally recognized human rights”) be reworded as 
> follows (changes in red):
> 
> “/By committing to one or more of these international instruments, 
> nation states are expected to embed human rights in their national 
> legislation*. */
> 
> */The UN Guiding Principles on Businesses and Human Rights are relevant 
> for business organizations. Insofar ICANN the Organization is concerned, 
> it should consider, as a business, the UN Guiding Principles on 
> Businesses and Human Rights as a useful guide when applying the Human 
> Rights Core Value./**“*
> 
> The UN Guiding Principles on Businesses and Human Rights (UNGP) are the 
> universally accepted voluntary standard for business organizations. 
> Therefore, we feel that it should be mentioned under the instruments 
> regarding “internationally recognized human rights”. In order to avoid 
> any extension of the UNGP to the non-business elements of ICANN (SO/ACs) 
> there is specific mention that the UNGP would be relevant only for ICANN 
> the Organization. In addition, the mention is constrained to having to 
> “consider” the UNGP “as a useful guide” – which, in our view, eliminates 
> any perceived danger of creating any obligation whatsoever through this 
> mention.
> 
> I hope that this compromise proposal may be positively considered by all 
> of you. Please note that it is made only by me with the aim of arriving 
> at a common ground and that it has not been possible to coordinate due 
> to time constraints with the other participants joining the dissent.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Jorge
> 
> *Von:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org 
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *Im Auftrag 
> von *Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 25. September 2017 15:34
> *An:* turcotte.bernard at gmail.com; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2 - 27-28 September 
> Plenary Agenda and Materials - 1 of 2
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> Regarding *agenda point 8* and specifically the *dissenting opinion* 
> attached to the Report from the Subgroup dealing with the Framework of 
> Interpretation (FOI) of the Human Rights Core Value (see p. 2 of the 
> attached document), which I have filed together with a number of 
> colleagues, I would like to share some thoughts and a suggested path 
> forward with the CCWG Plenary before the calls scheduled to discuss this.
> 
> The main point of the dissent is, in my view, that we feel that the 
> public comment period showed the existence of two schools of thought: 
> some that favored maintaining the text sent to public comment “as is” 
> (ALAC to a certain extent, and a number of different GNSO 
> constituencies) and those (UK, BRZ, and CH) proposing some steps 
> forward, especially in the recognition of the UN Guiding Principles 
> (Ruggie Principles).
> 
> However, again in our view, the discussions in the Subgroup did not 
> yield a properly balanced result, which would have reflected at least 
> some if not all of the positions and proposals made by the named 
> Governments. This relates in particular, _that the FOI text should make 
> stronger reference to the UN Guiding Principles as the most relevant 
> voluntary international standard_. In our view, the Subgroup did not 
> undertake an inclusive enough effort to determine if a compromise text 
> could be formulated that would accommodate this position of the three 
> governments.
> 
> Therefore, I would like to _suggest that the CCWG Plenary could decide 
> that some additional efforts to reaching a broader consensus on this 
> important issue should be made_ – a broader consensus that could be more 
> inclusive of all views expressed during the public comment period.
> 
> Hence, I would _suggest that the CCWG decides that the Report together 
> with the dissent are sent back to the Subgroup with the request that a 
> broader consensus solution is quickly sought within the coming e.g. 2 
> weeks after the Plenary call_.
> 
> I hope this way to proceed may seem reasonable to you and obtain your 
> support during the abovementioned call. I would be happy to answer any 
> questions you may have and look forward to your feedback.
> 
> For my part I’ll try hard to attend the Wednesday call, but I’m 
> (physically) attending at the same time /the UN CSTD Working Group on 
> Enhanced Cooperation/. Hence, I would be very thankful if this issue 
> could be discussed on the Thursday call instead if possible.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Jorge
> 
> *Von:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> 
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *Im Auftrag 
> von *Bernard Turcotte
> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 21. September 2017 18:05
> *An:* Accountability Cross Community 
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> *Betreff:* [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2 - 27-28 September Plenary 
> Agenda and Materials - 1 of 2
> 
> All,
> 
> Please fins below and attached the agenda for the 27-28 September plenary.
> 
> As noted in an earlier email the Co-Chairs do not believe the plenary 
> can get through all of these materials in a single two hour session and 
> that it is imperative we do so this week given the timing constraints we 
> are working under. As such an additional 2 hour plenary session has been 
> added 28 September 1900 UTC (the original plenary meeting scheduled for 
> 27 September 1300 UTC still stands).
> 
> Also please note that given the large volume of documents we will be 
> including these in two separate emails to avoid size limit issues for 
> participants.
> 
> Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or 
> problems with the documents.
> 
> Bernard Turcotte
> 
> ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
> 
> *Agenda for the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 Plenary of 27 and 28 September*
> 
> **
> 
> 1.Introduction, update to SOIs, reminder on standards of behavior
> 
> 2.Review of Agenda
> 
> 3.Administration
> 
> 3.1.Review timeline.
> 
> 3.2.Reminder of 27 October face to face in Abu Dhabi.
> 
> 3.3.Reminder of High Interest sessions in Abu Dhabi
> 
> 4.Legal Committee Update
> 
> 4.1.​         Question sent to ICANN Legal on Ombudsman recommendation 8 
> regarding the independence of the proposed Ombuds Advisory Panel 
> (questions sent directly to ICANN legal on approval of Co-chairs).
> 
> 4.2.Transparency – at the 13 September meeting of the sub-group updated 
> language for recommendations 2, 15 and 16 were considered. ICANN Legal 
> advised that they would consider these and provide written feedback to 
> the sub-group.
> 
> 5.Point on Quorum (held over from last plenary)
> 
> 6.Second Reading of the draft recommendations of the Diversity sub-group.
> 
>       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity-DrafRecommendations-20170927
>         (attached - same document as distributed to the 30 August plenary)
> 
> 7.First reading of the final recommendations of the SOAC Accountability 
> sub-group.
> 
>       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-FinalReport-20170927 (attached)
>       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-FinalReport-RedLine-20170927
>         (attached)
>       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-AnalysisandResponsetoPublicComments-20170927
>         (attached)
> 
> 8.First reading of the final recommendations of the Human Rights sub-group.
> 
>       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-HumanRight-FinalReportWithAdditions-20170927
>         (attached)
>       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-HumanRights-PublicConsultation-May2017-Responses
>         (attached)
> 
> 9.First reading of the draft recommendation of the Ombuds sub-group 
> (please note that the final report of the external review is provided as 
> a separate file due to size issues)
> 
>       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-DrafRecommendations-20170927
>         (attached in second email)
>       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-ExternalReview-Final (attached
>         in second email)
> 
> 10.First reading of the draft recommendation of the Staff Accountability 
> sub-group.
> 
>       o CCWG-Accountability-StaffAcct-DraftReport-20170927V1.6 (attached
>         in second email)
>       o CCWG-Accountability-StaffAcct-DraftReport-TrnasmissionLetter-20170927
>         (attached in second email)
> 
> 11.AOB
> 
> 12.​Next Plenaries
> 
> 12.1.Thursday 28 September 19:00UTC​
> 
> 12.2.Wednesday 4 October 0500 UTC (optional but please schedule)
> 
> 12.3.Wednesday 11 October 1300 UTC (optional but please schedule)
> 
> 12.4.Wednesday 18 October 1900UTC
> 
> 13.Adjournment
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> 


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list