[WP2] By law change on international law WAS Re: IRP provider appointment Was: updated documents from this morning

[Paul Twomey]

While I do not think this is exactly the sort of agreement about which I 
am positing, I would draw your attention to the recent China-Russian 
declaration of April 30.

A rough translation is attached.

The official announcement that is on the Russian government web site says:

"The directive approves a draft Russian-Chinese intergovernmental 
agreement on cooperation in ensuring international information security 
(hereinafter, the Agreement).
The Agreement aims to create a legal and organisational framework for 
Russian-Chinese cooperation in promoting international information security.
The Agreement identifies the principal threats and determines the main 
areas, principles, forms and mechanisms of cooperation in this area.
The Russian Foreign Ministry has been tasked with conducting talks with 
the Chinese side and, after coming to terms, signing this Agreement on 
behalf of the Russian Government.
The Agreement reflects Russia’s interests and position regarding the 
provision of international information security and consolidates 
Russian-Chinese strategic partnership, and its signing will help to 
promote mutually beneficial cooperation between Russia and China."


_*Three main issues in the agreement*_

1. the document is signed, because the parties are concerned about using 
the ICT for “undermining the sovereignty and the security of the states, 
and interference in their internal affairs… destabilization of  internal 
political and social-economic environment…”
2. The two governments confirm that "the national sovereignty and the 
international norms and regulations, result from this sovereignty, are 
defining the countries' behavior within the framework of their 
activities, connected to the use of ICT and the jurisdiction of the 
nation states over the information infrastructure on their territories, 
as well as the state has a sovereign right to define and to implement 
governmental policy, related to the information-telecommunication 
network "Internet" (everywhere in the original they call it like that), 
including security,
3. The two governments aim at creating a multilateral, democratic and 
transparent international system for management of the 
information-telecommunication network ‘Internet’ with the purpose of 
internationalization of the management of the Internet, and to make sure 
states have equal rights to participate in this process, including 
democratic management (governance) of the Internet core resources and 
their fair distribution..


Previously such agreements have been of significance for ICANN as part 
of the political environment in which it has to operate.  But it has 
been committed to its global mission.   Is the amendment to the bylaws 
inadvertantly making it an internal governance matter for ICANN?


Paul


On 7/30/15 3:55 AM, Paul Twomey wrote:
> +1 to Malcolm's comment on how much has been achieved.
>
> I am sorry that I was not able to attend Paris, but may I ask a 
> question about the amendment including international conventions in:
>
> 1.In performing its Mission, ICANN must operate in a manner consistent 
> with its Bylaws for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, 
> carrying out its activities in conformity with relevant principles of 
> international law, international conventions, and applicable local law 
> and through open and transparent processes that enable competition and 
> open entry in Internet-related markets.  Specifically, ICANN’s action 
> must:
>
>
> Did the group consider the situation where two or more authoritarian 
> countries sign an international statement or convention recognizing 
> that the DNS in their countries can only be coordinated by their 
> country institutions or worse recognizing that it can only be done by 
> multilateral organizations etc. Would this constitute an 
> "international convention" - a much less universal term than 
> "international law" - and hence would ICANN be bound by this bylaw to 
> recognize this?  Hence not be able to run a complete Root Zone in the 
> IANA, not be able to enter into registrar contracts for registrars in 
> those countries etc.
>
> Paul
>
> On 7/29/15 8:25 PM, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
>> Becky,
>>
>> These papers looks very good, and shows how much we have achieved. We
>> seem to be just about done, so congratulations.
>>
>> I can find on the paper just one note of disagreement still being
>> recorded, relating to the appointment of the IRP Provider.
>>
>> * Greg had proposed that the appointment process be conducted by ICANN
>> and the community jointly.
>>
>> * I had said I thought that this was likely to be unworkable, and that
>> it would be sufficient to have ICANN consult the community on the terms
>> of the tender process, but selection itself should be by ICANN.
>>
>> Where did we get to on this? I remember a back-and-forth between me and
>> Greg on this list, but don't remember it being discussed by the group.
>>
>> -> If it hasn't been decided by WP2 collectively, may I ask that you
>> test the group's opinion as to whether they prefer my approach or Greg's?
>>
>> -> If it has been decided and I just missed it, and the collective view
>> was to prefer Greg's proposal, you may remove the footnote noting my
>> disagreement: it is not my view that this is such a serious issue that I
>> would want to preserve my objection as a minority statement to go into
>> the Final Report for Public Comment.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Malcolm.
>>
>
> -- 
> Dr Paul Twomey
> Managing Director
> Argo P at cific
>
> US Cell: +1 310 279 2366
> Aust M: +61 416 238 501
>
> www.argopacific.com

-- 
Dr Paul Twomey
Managing Director
Argo P at cific

US Cell: +1 310 279 2366
Aust M: +61 416 238 501

www.argopacific.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp2/attachments/20150730/e4863c0f/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION(1).docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 145491 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp2/attachments/20150730/e4863c0f/GOVERNMENTOFTHERUSSIANFEDERATION1-0001.docx>