[cc-humanrights] Last call for CCWP charter

[Niels ten Oever]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 04/06/2015 08:55 AM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> 
>> On 6 apr 2015, at 08:29, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> NCSG recently sent a reply to the Board Risk Committee request
>> for feedback on Top 5 ICANN enterprise risks saying that "The
>> first, overarching risk is if staff and leadership think of ICANN
>> as an corporation with 'enterprise risks' rather than a
>> community-driven global governance mechanism with global public
>> responsibilities and associated risks.”  And here we’re saying
>> that we think of ICANN as an corporation with enterprise social
>> responsibilities, some of which relate to human rights.  So I
>> guess it’s sort of the same argument one would make for
>> Caterpillar Tractor or Exxon, except that the ‘product’ is
>> policy.  I understand why CSR and the Ruggie principles appeal to
>> people as an established ‘hook’ to say ICANN must pay attention,
>> but somehow feel some vague discomfort with the ontological
>> aspect.  Being on my first coffee of the day and not being a
>> specialist in HR law I don’t have a clear vision of what the full
>> implications of taking this down the CSR road might be relative
>> to other possible paths, but if you all are confident it’s
>> optimal then okydoky.
> 
> FWIW, I agree with you Bill that there is a risk here that the 
> discussion focus too much on the enterprise thinking on risk when
> in reality it is important ICANN both take care of the enterprise
> risks (which is the responsibility of ICANN as the corporation
> leadership and staff) AND the risks ICANN as the community take in
> the development of policies and what not.
> 
> Specifically as, which I agree with, ICANN is more and more acting 
> as a corporation and less as a community with a few strong PDPs
> that they host.
> 
> That said, I think we now do have something we all understand what 
> we want. We just need to choose the correct words.
> 

I have been talking to several CSR people and reviewing the text Patrik
proposed. For easy editing and a clear overview I put the several
versions here: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/icannhr

By adding Corporate Social Responsibility to the work of this working
party we're expanding the scope far beyond human rights. Initially we
have tried to make the scope smaller by only having a look at first
generation human rights, and predominantly freedom of expression and the
right to privacy and the impact ICANN has on them.
CSR opens up the discussion on: The impact of a company on economic,
environmental and social impacts caused by its everyday activities.
These are a lot of different things, far beyond what was initially
envisioned. Ranging from CO2 emisions, travel policy, transparency,
renumeration, supply chain disclosure,
I've been having a look at the best practices in CSR-land, and it is
quite huge: https://www.globalreporting.org/

If we manage to produce a report provuides an analysis and
recommendations based on the IHRB report [0] that Patrik mentioned is,
would for me be a perfect outcome of our work, but I am curious if
people think we should go further.

Patrik mentioned that he wanted to include topics of labor in this
work, but that seems covered by the UN Guiding Principles on Business
and Human Rights and are also addressed in the IHRB report.

So I just want to make sure that our scope is wide enough to include
everything we want to do, but narrow enough to keep it manageable.

Currently I am not 100% sure if we are discussing semantics, or issues
we want to tackle, it seems we are discussing the difference between
things that mean the same to me:

1. CCWP on ICANN and Human Rights
2. CCWP on ICANNs Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights
3. CCWP on ICANN CSR issues related to Human Rights

But I think that this has a far wider scope:

4. CCWP on Corporate Social Responsibility for ICANN

And this email made me want to check with you Patrik if we're talking
about the same thing:

On 04/05/2015 04:42 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> I just do not want this to be a CCWG on Human Rights. It should be
> on ICANN CSR issues related to Human Rights.
> 
> And once again, if I am alone in being sensitive on this kind of 
> wording, let me know. Then I rest my case ;-)

Looking forward to discuss!

Best,

Niels

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVIqwUAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpA7wIAJm9ofyxpkBtGtQA0Jo2vo9g
fLksan03hx3DML9VK/Rj7Z32ajQD2nPMjRHa8KVrAw4ArTX9VLq+PBZ9IUPQf/XV
6C93ZW00Sy0/InxyedhQSR0U0rmn2DXdwqeP3ayL58oG9GdNNOLUP54TyojUw0KL
t9toU8h4CDGQcpA040NQfIQOVh+JmYM4a69eFY2yv1okBG+xUoHwtVTwi46HJWeH
Y2Bf/4dsic/HacK2sCbzk6fMkgKubJQ6w4R46B3TwV9rBwPLO83I3tqL7yJ42iGD
36wUwcTbRiK0/HNVHGDTwI3xrcwJlJJkOeAmnbTvLi6ZlW9WwZ4gEI6+UQbgTvI=
=MgIK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----