[cc-humanrights] Last call for CCWP charter

[Niels ten Oever]

On 04/06/2015 06:12 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>> 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/
> 
> Yes, CSR is a VERY broad topic. One must scope it.
> 
>> 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.
> 
> No, I said we COULD do that.
> 
> I agree we must be scoped.
> 
>> 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:
> 
> To me semantics.

Happy to hear this all. Let's work it out :)
> 
>> 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!
> 
> So it is [3] above I am asking for, of your four alternatives.
> 
> But I understand the view of Bill that it might be viewed
> immediately as "ICANN as the corporation", so I can go with a name
> of the CCWG that is as [1].
> 
> I will have a look at the document you produced online Niels.
> 
> Once again, I am sensitive to "Human Rights" as I very strongly see
> Human Rights are agreements between states on what they MUST do and
> what they MUST NEVER do. Everyone else is acting in that context.
> For example by doing activities that forces States to change their
> behavior. Or by acting in a specific way just because States do
> misbehave (but one have to do things there anyway).
> 
> It might have been teachers I have had that hammered this possibly
> too drastic view into my brain...but there you are.
> 
> And still, I can view myself be in the minority here.
> 
> Patrik
> 

Very happy to have your voice in this discussion Patrik (isn't human
rights all about protecting minorities ;) ). Previously we noticed
that as long as we were talking about Human Rights, people thought we
were going to have ICANN as an advocacy organizations against torture.
Adding 'ICANNs Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights' made
things much clearer for many people (and linked it very directly to
the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights). So great to
be able to test what is the best language to describe what we want to do.

There are indeed different obligations for states (that should protect
human rights) and for other actors (that should respect human rights),
which is both a responsibility.

It's just that CSR has become quite something of a marketing term for
a lot of different things, so I would be afraid that it would create
more confusion than it would solve. But if you think the opposite,
what would you think of:

5. CCWP on ICANNs Corporate Social Responsibility to respect Human
Rights ?

I think it would help deciding on this before I go edit the document.

Finally, Bill: do you think the issue about 'corporate' is more of an
issue in CSR than in CR ? Because this was not brought up at the
discussion in Singapore even though the title of the session was
ICANNs Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights.

Looking forward to discuss.

Best,

Niels

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cc-humanrights/attachments/20150406/475b0e40/signature.asc>