[cc-humanrights] Considerations on next steps

Mon Mar 23 12:02:47 UTC 2015

Hi Michele,

I copied and paste the proposed text for your convenience ;)

Rafik
2015-03-23 21:01 GMT+09:00 Michele Neylon - Blacknight <
michele at blacknight.com>:

>  Brevity is not your forte :-)
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Hosting & Domains
> http://www.blacknight.host/
> http://www.mneylon.social
> Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal
>
> On 23 Mar 2015, at 11:58, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   Hi Michele,
>
>  we will go along with the idea of working party. and we are going to
> have a confcall soon.
> Niels and Marilia drafted document, what they already shared here. with
> the objectives and scope for the working party.
>
>  "Draft goals and scope for CCWP HR
>
> Cross-community working party for analyzing potential Human Rights
> implications of ICANN’s policies and procedures
>
>  Member organizations: (name the SOs and ACs)
>
> Each of the participating Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory
> Committees (ACs) agrees to work towards achieving the goals of this
> document and to seek input and participation from their communities.
>
>
>  Background:
>
> This cross community working party (CCWP) seeks to map and understand
> the issues and potential solutions for the impact that policies,
> procedures and operations of the Internet Corporation for Assigned
> Names and Numbers (ICANN) have on human rights. In particular it
> focuses on the corporate responsibility of ICANN to respect human
> rights. It builds on a long term community engagement on this topic,
> further catalysed with the publication of the paper 'ICANN's
> procedures and policies in the light of human rights, fundamental
> freedoms and democratic values', as commissioned by the Council of
> Europe, and after sessions held in London, Los Angeles and Singapore.
>  It seeks to improve ICANN's measures to respect human rights, in
> accordance with article 4 of ICANN's articles of incorporation.
>
>  Objective:
>
> The CCWP on ICANN and Human Rights would have the purpose to raise
> awareness, provide information, facilitate dialogue and make
> suggestions to the ICANN community on ways to better harmonize ICANN’s
> policies and procedures with internationally recognized human rights
> standards, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
> and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
> The working party will focus on human rights that are directly
> impacted by ICANN policy decisions, procedures and operations.
>
>  Responsibilities and scope of work:
>
> (i) To continue the process of raising awareness about the interplay
> between ICANN’s policies, procedures and operations and human rights;
>
> (ii) To map and collect information from the community about cases as
> well as current ICANN policies,procedures and operations that present
> an impact on human rights in which further guidance on how to
> harmonize policies and procedures with human rights would be necessary;;
>
>  (iii) To develop guidelines for the procedures that are in place or
> that should be created in the policy development process to ensure the
> respect for human rights;
>
> (iv) To provide information, suggestions and recommendations to the
> chartering organizations and to the broader ICANN community on how
> ICANN’s policies and procedures can be developed and implemented
> consistent with internationally recognized human rights standards.
> This input can inform the policy development processes as defined in
> the ICANN Bylaws.
>
> (v) To propose procedures and mechanisms with the aim of producing
> assessments on if and how policies and procedures under developed
> and/or being implemented may impact on human rights.
>
> (vi) Draft Position Papers and Statements as deemed appropriate
>
> (vii) To carry out further discussions about the pertinence and timing
> for the creation of a cross-community working group on this issue.
>
>
>  Membership
>
> The membership of the Working Party on ICANN and Human Rights is
> proposed to include members representing the diversity of the ICANN
> community. The Working Party will serve as a focal point for the
> discussion, knowledge dissemination and communication about the impact
> of ICANN's policies and procedures on Human Rights  Its activities
> will be conducted in an open and fully transparent manner."
>
>  Rafik
>
> 2015-03-18 23:04 GMT+09:00 Michele Neylon - Blacknight <
> michele at blacknight.com>:
>
>> So what are the next steps?
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mr Michele Neylon
>> Blacknight Solutions
>> Hosting & Colocation, Domains
>> http://www.blacknight.host/
>> http://blog.blacknight.com/
>> http://www.blacknight.press/
>> http://www.technology.ie/
>> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 <%2B353%20%280%29%2059%20%209183072>
>> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>> Social: http://mneylon.social
>> -------------------------------
>> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business
>> Park,Sleaty
>> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cc-humanrights-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>> cc-humanrights-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 2:29 AM
>> To: Amr Elsadr
>> Cc: cc-humanrights at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [cc-humanrights] Considerations on next steps
>>
>> Dear Amr,
>>
>> sorry if my message sounded professorial in tone - it was just to
>> illustrate the trials and time wasted on process when the ALAC & NCSG did
>> something which appeared to be nimble to start with - ICANN catches up with
>> you! :-) We're in violent agreement.
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Olivier
>>
>> On 18/03/2015 09:31, Amr Elsadr wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Coming from a part of the world where due process (along with human
>> rights) is pretty much an alien notion, I have an affinity for process
>> wherever I can find it. :) But I appreciate the frustration in processes
>> hampering effectiveness and efficiency.
>> >
>> > I agree that we don't need to follow in the footsteps of the CCWG-IG.
>> That's why I also believe a working party is a constructive first step.
>> Only meant to use it as an example for a CCWG that was established with
>> only one of the GNSO's stakeholder groups along with another AC. I don't
>> recall it ever being referred to as a joint working group rather than a
>> CCWG, but if you say so, I will defer to your account of it.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> > Amr
>> >
>> > On Mar 18, 2015, at 2:29 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dear Amr:
>> >>
>> >> On 17/03/2015 20:42, Amr Elsadr wrote:
>> >>> However, I would like to note something at this time. Contrary to
>> >>> what Jean-Jaques said, a CCWG does not necessarily need to be
>> >>> chartered by the GNSO as a whole. Although that would be desirable,
>> >>> a single Stakeholder Group (or more than one) within the GNSO could
>> >>> adopt a charter if any other SO or AC is willing to participate as a
>> >>> chartering organization. The CCWG-IG is an example of a CCWG that
>> >>> came into existence before the GNSO adopted a charter. It started
>> >>> off by being an initiative by the NCSG and ALAC. This was partly
>> >>> because the charter of the CCWG was adopted many months after the
>> >>> CCWG-IG actually began its work.
>> >> I wouldn't take the CCWG on Internet Governance as an example. We
>> >> initially started as a joint working group between the ALAC and the
>> >> NCSG. This was picked up by David Olive and announced. We hoped
>> >> others would joint and they did indeed, but rather fast and we ended
>> >> up working without a charter, which was not ideal - especially with
>> >> people trying to discredit the legitimacy of the group itself. It
>> >> took several months to draft a charter and have it ratified by most
>> >> (but not all) of the SOs and ACs and over a year later we're still
>> >> grappling with the make-up of the CCWG's membership.
>> >>
>> >> That's the reason why I recommended we do not go down the CCWG route
>> >> and that we set-up some kind of Working Party. Ultimately, I know,
>> >> it's all "process" and I wish we didn't have so much red tape around
>> >> things. :-)
>> >>
>> >> Kindest regards,
>> >>
>> >> Olivier
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
>> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cc-humanrights mailing list
>> cc-humanrights at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
>> _______________________________________________
>> cc-humanrights mailing list
>> cc-humanrights at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cc-humanrights/attachments/20150323/04fdcec4/attachment-0001.html>