[WP2] slightly revised mission, commitments, core values for discussion later today
Avri Doria
avri at acm.org
Thu Jul 23 06:38:58 UTC 2015
hi,
I believe we can if we remember that GAC advice, which has a critical
role in informing the debate, is not determinative and that Board action
and IRP needs to be consistent with the bylaws. While I agree that GAC
advice does not necessarily need to confine itself to the bylaws, it is
critical that the organization, at the end of the day, do so.
I must admit, however, that I have difficulty with seeing governments,
the duty bearers for rights, as actually having rights as governments.
In discussing the Tunis Agenda, and its claim to governmental rights in
TA 35a, it is important to remember that this was not a multistakeholder
document and that its designation of roles and responsibilities is still
a matter of much contention among other stakeholders - indeed a rather
lengthy debate that has continued since the uni-stakeholder adoption of
the Tunis Agenda. It is also important to remember that this document
does not have the force of treaty.
thanks
avri
On 23-Jul-15 08:16, Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch wrote:
> A couple of thoughts: there is an international dimension to public policy and within Icann that should be evident - it is understood that this dimension is a shared responsibility for governments, otherwise we would be talking about just national policy which is not the case when talking about Icann.
>
> I wonder whether this potentially rather lengthy debate is needed in terms of the ccwg mission at this stage and what exactly triggered the insertion of the wording...
>
> a different approach would be to state that governments have rights and responsibilities regarding national and international public policy, trying to stick to internationally agreed language as the Tunis Agenda.
>
> best
>
> Jorge Cancio
>
>
> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
>
>> Am 23.07.2015 um 05:38 schrieb Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This has long been a sticking point in international discussions.
>>
>> The governments are by and large unwilling to accept the limitation that
>> their sovreignity applies only witin their national borders. They have
>> argued in other venues, that given that they meet together as
>> sovereigns, when they reach consensus, they have resposnbility for
>> global public policy.
>>
>> This is essentially true on anything that reaches the level of global
>> treaty, which is then signed and ratified. I believe the GAC assumes
>> the same power for its decisions.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>> On 22-Jul-15 18:52, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>> I think the rationale was that any particular government or public
>>> authority is only responsible for public policy within its own
>>> jurisdiction.
>>>
>>> Thus, that would mean that governments and public authorities are only
>>> responsible for public policy within their respective jurisdictions.
>>>
>>> Without this addition, one could read the original statement to
>>> propose that any government or grouping of governments can take on a
>>> public policy issue, without being limited to their jurisdiction or
>>> jurisdiction(s).
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Mathieu Weill
>>> <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Becky,
>>>
>>> I remember some pushback from the right side of the room on the
>>> jurisdiction but am not sure who. Someone reminded me privately of
>>> this part of the Tunis agenda, which specifically does not mention
>>> this : « Policy authority for Internet-related public policy
>>> issues is the sovereign right of States. They have rights and
>>> responsibilities for international Internet-related public policy
>>> issues. » (para 35 I think).
>>>
>>> But as I said, my main concern so far is that I am unable to
>>> locate our own rationale for that proposal. We were also
>>> challenged about not providing the rationale for our core value
>>> changes. I'd like to help bridging this gap.
>>>
>>> So if someone could expand about why they feel so strongly about it ?
>>>
>>> Mathieu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 22/07/2015 18:12, Burr, Becky a écrit :
>>>> The suggestion for using ATRT language is a good one.
>>>>
>>>> I don’t remember pushback on the "within their respective
>>>> jurisdictions" language in Paris – and I would have because
>>>> several members of WP2 feel very strongly about this point.
>>>>
>>>> J. Beckwith Burr
>>>>
>>>> *Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
>>>>
>>>> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
>>>>
>>>> Office: + 1.202.533.2932 <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932> Mobile:
>>>> +1.202.352.6367 <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> / becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz
>>>> <http://www.neustar.biz>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
>>>> <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>
>>>> Reply-To: "Mathieu.Weill at afnic.fr
>>>> <mailto:Mathieu.Weill at afnic.fr>" <Mathieu.Weill at afnic.fr
>>>> <mailto:Mathieu.Weill at afnic.fr>>
>>>> Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 at 6:43 AM
>>>> To: Becky Burr <becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz>>, Robin Gross
>>>> <robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>
>>>> Cc: "wp2 at icann.org <mailto:wp2 at icann.org>" <wp2 at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:wp2 at icann.org>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [WP2] slightly revised mission, commitments, core
>>>> values for discussion later today
>>>>
>>>> Dear WP2 colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> I want to thank all of you for trying very hard to find agreement
>>>> on all these topics. I appreciate how everyone is keeping an open
>>>> mind.
>>>>
>>>> I may have missed this in the discussions but what is the
>>>> rationale for inserting the words "within their respective
>>>> jurisdictions" in Core Value 7 (ex-11). I remember we had some
>>>> pushback on this in Paris.
>>>>
>>>>> While remaining rooted in the [private sector], including
>>>>> business stakeholders, civil society, the technical community,
>>>>> and academia, recognizing that governments and public
>>>>> authorities are responsible for public policy _within their
>>>>> respective jurisdictions_ and duly taking into account the
>>>>> public policy advice of governments and public authorities
>>>> The proposed addition in Article XI of the sentence below is
>>>> also attracting some pushback.
>>>>> or where the Advisory Committee has not explained the specific
>>>>> reason(s) for its advice.
>>>> My personal view is that it may not be most appropriate to have
>>>> this criteria in the same sentence and at the same level as "not
>>>> exceeding the Mission".
>>>>
>>>> I also wonder whether we could find ATRT agreed language on the
>>>> provision of rationales in support of advice. It seemed to me
>>>> that these reviews had contributed to significant improvements in
>>>> that regard and the use of "agreed language" often helps when
>>>> time is short.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Le 21/07/2015 20:43, Burr, Becky a écrit :
>>>>> Whoops, apologies – will fix that in the discussion
>>>>>
>>>>> J. Beckwith Burr
>>>>>
>>>>> *Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
>>>>>
>>>>> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
>>>>>
>>>>> Office: + 1.202.533.2932 <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932> Mobile:
>>>>> +1.202.352.6367
>>>>> <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> / becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz
>>>>> <http://www.neustar.biz>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>
>>>>> Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 2:36 PM
>>>>> To: Becky Burr <becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz>>
>>>>> Cc: "wp2 at icann.org <mailto:wp2 at icann.org>" <wp2 at icann.org
>>>>> <mailto:wp2 at icann.org>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [WP2] slightly revised mission, commitments, core
>>>>> values for discussion later today
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks good - except it is missing the critical word of "not".
>>>>> So it should read:
>>>>>
>>>>> /[...] ICANN shall have no authority to act or refrain from
>>>>> acting in response to inputadvice from an Advisory Committee
>>>>> where such advice would require ICANN to exceed its Mission or
>>>>> violate these Bylaws or where the Advisory Committee has not
>>>>> explained the specific reason(s) for its advice./
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>> Robin
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jul 21, 2015, at 11:30 AM, Burr, Becky wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> J. Beckwith Burr
>>>>>> *Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
>>>>>> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
>>>>>> Office: + 1.202.533.2932 <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932> Mobile:
>>>>>> +1.202.352.6367
>>>>>> <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> / becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz
>>>>>> <http://www.neustar.biz>
>>>>>> <7-21 Mission and Core Values
>>>>>> V2.docx>_______________________________________________
>>>>>> WP2 mailing list
>>>>>> WP2 at icann.org <mailto:WP2 at icann.org>
>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2
>>>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_wp2&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=0YxHNC-x-sRZHXkgEdhPwR1sJq8xsrcTlYDKvCbZ5bE&s=h0LK7Kd1BiEj2pKkN2qhUfxX-nVupNaB4WFXxhnaGBw&e=>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> WP2 mailing list
>>>>> WP2 at icann.org <mailto:WP2 at icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_wp2&d=AwMD-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=0YxHNC-x-sRZHXkgEdhPwR1sJq8xsrcTlYDKvCbZ5bE&s=h0LK7Kd1BiEj2pKkN2qhUfxX-nVupNaB4WFXxhnaGBw&e=>
>>>> --
>>>> *****************************
>>>> Mathieu WEILL
>>>> AFNIC - directeur général
>>>> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 <tel:%2B33%201%2039%2030%2083%2006>
>>>> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
>>>> Twitter : @mathieuweill
>>>> *****************************
>>> --
>>> *****************************
>>> Mathieu WEILL
>>> AFNIC - directeur général
>>> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 <tel:%2B33%201%2039%2030%2083%2006>
>>> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
>>> Twitter : @mathieuweill
>>> *****************************
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WP2 mailing list
>>> WP2 at icann.org <mailto:WP2 at icann.org>
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WP2 mailing list
>> WP2 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2
> _______________________________________________
> 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
More information about the WP2
mailing list