<div dir="ltr"><div>Bruce,</div><div>Your Resolution needs to capture major elements of the Recommendation regarding HF WITH A CLEAR ONE OR MORE RESOLVES TO provide the firm committment.</div><div>Regards</div><div>Kavouss </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-01-28 8:58 GMT+01:00 Kavouss Arasteh <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com" target="_blank">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Yes </div><div>You are absolutely right.</div><div>I can not agree more than what you very well described, But THERE ARE MAJOR DIVERGENCE OF VIEWS .</div><div>We have two options :</div><div>One which was on the table by CCWG as a possible emerged consensus </div><div>Another as the Board mentioned BUT to be accompanied by a strong REsolution as a firm committments to respect ,observe and implement the fundamental right as you mentined, That Board's Resolution yet to be drafted agreed by Board ,examined by CCWG and ensorded by CCWG</div><div>Regards</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div>Kavouss </div></font></span></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-01-28 5:42 GMT+01:00 Seth Johnson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:seth.p.johnson@gmail.com" target="_blank">seth.p.johnson@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid">Seriously need to say fundamental rights are the question. Treaty<br>
human rights are weak, and the concern has to be that the transition<br>
involves a loss of the strict standard that relates to fundamental<br>
rights. This might have been the standard the NTIA would have been<br>
expected to apply in its semiregular reviews of ICANN. But note,<br>
since there's no reference to the constitution (of the US, just by<br>
happenstance, could have been any other country with a constitutional<br>
basis for rights) but just rights like free speech, the NTIA is free<br>
to just say all they would have applied would have been the standards<br>
that apply internationally.<br>
<br>
The UN always says "human rights" and "fundamental freedoms" rather<br>
than "fundamental rights" because saying fundamental raises the issue<br>
of the fact that treaty-based rights are weak.<br>
<br>
The international standard is really weak. There's no way to overrule<br>
a treaty on the basis of another treaty, because even if one is on<br>
human rights and another is on, say, fighting terror, both are enacted<br>
by the same "body" -- participating governments. So the standard is<br>
at best how do the two treaties interact and balance against each<br>
other.<br>
<br>
If you just issue a statement on human rights, they've conned the<br>
group again, all along keeping the discussion narrowly focused on the<br>
issue of how to structure ICANN -- which never could have addressed<br>
the implications of the transition, from the start -- as I think you<br>
are seeing.<br>
<span><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Seth Johnson<br>
</font></span><div><div><br>
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Bruce Tonkin<br>
<<a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au" target="_blank">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hello Kavouss,<br>
><br>
><br>
>>> For the Human Rights issue, one suggestion was to follow the Board's request ( Not to include any thing about HR in the transitional/ intermediate Bylaws but receiving the Board's FIRM Commitment IN A BOARD'S RESOLUTION APPROVED AND SENT TO CCWG IMMEDIATELY) enabling CCWG whether it could endorse that and annex it to the Bylaws to cool down those who are worried about the HR.<br>
><br>
> Thanks for this suggestion. It is under active consideration by the Board.<br>
><br>
> One possible option is that we pass a resolution in support of human rights principles in our meeting in Singapore next week.<br>
><br>
> I will provide an update next week.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Bruce Tonkin<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>