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

[avri doria]

Hi,

I do not see the problem with including a statement such as this.

Perhaps I would indicate that it was a not for profit business instead
of a business and would insert an "as appropriate" after "as a useful
guide".

But I think mentioning this among the international instruments is a
good idea.

avri


On 28-Sep-17 08:21, 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