[WP2] profound apologies and discussion on the human rights issue

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

Yes indeed we are subject to many international laws.

The point about the human rights statement in the bylaws goes beyond the
need to wait for an IRP to rule that we have somehow infringed on those
treaties and covenants  The bylaw statement requires us to understand
the impact our policies have on human rights.  The abstract mention of
International Law in the Articles does not give us bylaws guidance on
how to adhere to these obligations ald leaves them far too abstract.

As the comment we received indicated,  being specifc about these is
relevant to the day to day bottom up multistakeholder policy making.

To put it another way, if people assume we are already responsible for
this, why is there such a strong resistance to the inclusion of a bylaws
requirement to understand their impact by some constituencies?  And what
sort of 'optics' does this continual shying awy from understanding the
human rights impact of our policies make?

I do not believe that we should answer these comments we received with
'read the articles, it is in there if you look real hard'.  I also
beleive this might be important enough for a minority statement in the
accountability recommendation, as for ICANN to continue blithely along
without taking serious account of its human rights impact is a great
mistake in terms of global accountabilty.

thanks

avri

On 20-Jul-15 18:22, Burr, Becky wrote:
> First -  thanks for all the hard work in Paris.
>
> Second – huge apologies – for some reason my computer was still on
> Paris time when I checked my calendar, so I thought the call was later
>
> Third, I think the most significant open issue with respect to the
> Mission, Commitments and Core Values.  Nigel pointed us to a
> "controversial IRP" that addressed the topic of human rights.  I took
> a look at the ICM decision, and indeed it did turn in significant part
> on the inclusion of international law in ICANN’s Articles of
> Incorporation.  Not sure if this is what he was referring to said
> ICANN has already subjected itself to international law, including
> human rights
>
> In paragraph 58, the declaration says  
>
>         /Professor Goldsmith observes that: “… “principles of
>         international law and applicable international conventions and
>         local law” refers to three types of law. Local law means the
>         law of California. Applicable international conventions refers
>         to treaties. “The term ‘principles of international law’
>         includes general principles of law. Given that the canonical
>         reference to the sources of international law is Article 38 of
>         the Statute of the International Court of Justice, which lists
>         international conventions, customary international law, and
>         “the general principles of law recognized by civilized
>         nations”, the reference to “principles of international law”
>         in ICANN’s Articles must refer to customary international law
>         and to the general principles of law. (Expert Report, p. 12.) /
>
>
> Article 38 of the International Court of Justice reads (in relevant
> part) as follows:
>
>  The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with
> international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply:
>
>     a. international conventions, whether general or particular,
>     establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states;
>
>     b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice
>     accepted as law;
>
>     c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
>
>     d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and
>     the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the
>     various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of
>     rules of law.
>
>
> I am reminded that in addition to the reference to international law
> in the Articles of Incorporation, we brought international law into
> the Mission, Commitments, and Core Values – in fact it is the very
> first commitment.  Given the strong feelings on both sides of this
> issue I am wondering whether the current language already reflects
> ICANN’s obligation not to violate human rights?  Thoughts?
>
>
>
> J. Beckwith Burr
>
> *Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
>
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
>
> Office: + 1.202.533.2932  Mobile: 
> +1.202.352.6367  / becky.burr at neustar.biz
> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WP2 mailing list
> WP2 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus