[cc-humanrights] Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on Recommendation 6 - Human Rights

Marianne Franklin m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk
Thu Feb 4 10:38:14 UTC 2016

Dear all

+1 from me! A great step forward.


On 04/02/2016 10:35, HIBBARD Lee wrote:
> Congratulations to the CCWP! This is great news.
> Regards to all - Lee
> Lee Hibbard
> Internet Governance Coordinator
> Council of Europe - DG1 Human Rights and Rule of Law
> Tel: +33 388 41 3104 / www.coe.int
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cc-humanrights-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cc-humanrights-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Niels ten Oever
> Sent: jeudi 4 février 2016 10:02
> To: Human Rights
> Subject: [cc-humanrights] Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on Recommendation 6 - Human Rights
> Hash: SHA256
> Dear all,
> The CCWG on Accountability has achieved consensus on human rights
> commitment in the bylaws (as part of the CCWG proposal) now the board
> has agreed to the text proposed by the CCWG.
> The interpretation framework will be part of Workstream 2.
> Congratulations all. Exciting work ahead!
> Best,
> Niels
> - -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on Recommendation 6 - Human Rights
> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 07:33:34 +0000
> From: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>
> To: CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
> Hello All,
> In the spirit of the compromise throughout the CCWG proceedings, the
> Board is modifying its position, and is supportive of inserting a
> commitment to respect human rights into the ICANN Bylaws as follows:
> 	"Within its Core Values, ICANN will commit to respect internationally
> recognized Human Rights as required by applicable law. This provision
> does not create any additional obligation for ICANN to respond to or
> consider any complaint, request, or demand seeking the enforcement of
> human rights by ICANN. This Bylaw provision will not enter into force
> until (1) a Framework of Interpretation for Human Rights (FOI-HR) is
> developed by the CCWG-Accountability (or another Cross Community
> Working Group chartered for such purpose by one or more Supporting
> Organizations or Advisory Committees) as a consensus recommendation in
> Work Stream 2 (including Chartering Organizations' approval) and (2)
> the FOI-HR is approved by the ICANN Board using the same process and
> criteria it has committed to use to consider the Work Stream 1
> recommendations."
> Rationale:
> The clause on the timing of the effective date of the Bylaws provision
> addressed many, though not all, of the Board's timing concerns.  There
> were still significant concerns regarding some of the other detail,
> including possible interpretations that could impose human rights
> responsibilities on those with whom ICANN does business, or whether
> there are things that ICANN should affirmatively be doing today, in
> addition to compliance with law.
> One of the most pressing concerns that remained with the language was
> on the potential impact on external entities.  The Board remained
> concerned that the CCWG's attempt to exclude reach to "entit[ies]
> having a relationship with ICANN", could actually be interpreted in a
> manner that increases - not insulates - the reach of this provision.
> When ICANN is challenged for conduct alleged to be in violation of
> applicable laws on human rights, that that challenge could also reach
> third parties for alleged failures to protect or enforce human rights
> within applicable law.  This could reach entities with or without
> contracts, and many of which (including ICANN) have no enforcement
> power when it comes to the law.  This is a potential path to placing
> an affirmative (and out of mission) obligation to police those with
> whom ICANN has relationships for potential failures to protect or
> enforce human rights.
> This language could leave the door open for those doing business with
> ICANN to be held to, for example, the applicable laws in the USA or
> another place where ICANN is found to do business.  The applicable law
> is not defined as it applies to entities with relationships with
> ICANN, nor is that the type of language normally included in Bylaws.
> The Board supports the removal of the language that causes it concern,
> while allowing the CCWG to move forward with a recommendation to
> include a commitment in the Bylaws that ICANN treats human rights as a
> core value that guides the decisions and actions of ICANN:.  We hope
> this compromise can allow this issue to be closed.
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> ICANN Board Liaison to the CCWG
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> Version: GnuPG v2
> 7WXLonDf+DtQtcCQ6vtmO69ua0HpQFweYYRA4HdFBG8vhJe6GqzhoaMcbfrXR7yh
> OkECLtE/h/7r2f+PGY1IvwhkmD/gjpyxIoLvj7H0m2DsA3lLm8atmReNJIlPMlhZ
> f1SDGCqP9Q5+O3EVVXiy0qPOO3CEtbq5EVkr6VAIoTcyEaJvNtM5edD3rMww6Onc
> n+7VVaHD6lNE3LuGi9BGO0OJ4qPWQ6oTKDiLa8q6qqtX6wZqNNfdeOUnSp83cvvJ
> 7nmErGKFhSd6z8j3ZOBeu1vt2ca/VgXZrYjcbKas5HsxyCXIMdqI+PyEGxw9PCw=
> =9DmN
> _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the cc-humanrights mailing list