[Wp4] New report on ICANN and Human Rights
Paul Twomey
paul.twomey at argopacific.com
Fri Oct 30 03:33:32 UTC 2015
Yes Leon. Would be pleased to.
On 10/30/15 2:26 PM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
> Thanks for this offer Paul. Would you be able to provide this
> explanation on our call?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> León
>
>> El 28/10/2015, a las 3:39 p.m., Paul Twomey
>> <paul.twomey at argopacific.com <mailto:paul.twomey at argopacific.com>>
>> escribió:
>>
>> HI Niels
>>
>> Thanks for your reply.
>>
>> I think the best I can do is ask for some time on Friday to explain
>> the practical steps involved in changes of tld operator (especially a
>> cctld operator) both through requests for redelegation and also
>> requests for changes in the zone file through the IANA process.
>> Because it is several of these where I see ICANN being practically
>> engaged in recognizing end empowering a related party which could be
>> guilty of human rights abuse.
>>
>> As for the Ruggie Principles, let me point again to principle 13 and
>> its commentary (and that of principle 19):
>>
>> 13.
>>
>> The responsibility to respect human rights requires that business
>>
>> enterprises:
>>
>> (a)
>>
>> Avoid causing or contributing to adverse human rights impacts
>>
>> through their own activities, and address such impacts when they
>>
>> occur;
>>
>> (b)
>>
>> Seek to prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts that are
>>
>> *directly linked to their operations, products or services by their *
>>
>> **
>>
>> *business relationships*, even if they have not contributed to those
>>
>> impacts.
>>
>> (/Emphasis added - this is the nature of the IANA functions
>> relationship with ccTLDs) //
>> /
>>
>>
>> Commentary
>>
>> Business enterprises may be involved with adverse human rights
>> impacts either
>>
>> through their own activities or as a result of their business
>> relationships with
>>
>> other parties. Guiding Principle 19 elaborates further on the
>> implications for
>>
>> how business enterprises should address these situations. For the
>> purpose of
>>
>> these Guiding Principles a business enterprise’s “activities” are
>> understood
>>
>> to include both actions and omissions; and its “business
>> relationships” are
>>
>> understood to include relationships with business partners, entities
>> in its
>>
>> value chain, and any other non-State or State entity directly linked
>> to its
>>
>> business operations, products or services
>>
>> Commentary on Principle 19
>>
>> The more complex the situation and its implications for human rights, the
>>
>> stronger is the case for the enterprise to draw on independent expert
>> advice
>>
>> in deciding how to respond. */(ICANN is the body to make decisions on
>> tlds - there is not another expert body)/*
>>
>> If the business enterprise has leverage to prevent or mitigate the
>> adverse
>>
>> impact, it should exercise it. And if it lacks leverage there may be
>> ways for
>>
>> the enterprise to increase it. Leverage may be increased by, for example,
>>
>> offering capacity-building or other incentives to the related entity, or
>>
>> collaborating with other actors. */(ICANN should not be asked to put
>> political leverage on a government - it will destroy its apolitical
>> role)/**//*
>>
>> *//*
>>
>> There are situations in which the enterprise lacks the leverage to
>> prevent
>>
>> or mitigate adverse impacts and is unable to increase its leverage. Here,
>>
>> the enterprise should consider ending the relationship, taking into
>> account
>>
>> credible assessments of potential adverse human rights impacts of
>> doing so. *(ICANN cannot consider ending a relationship with a cctld
>> and still operate the IANA functions )***
>>
>> ** *
>> **
>> *It seems to me that Ruggie Principles basically are saying if
>> another party in which you are in a business relationship continues
>> to breach human rights you should consider ending the relationship.
>>
>> this is just what ICANN can NOT do with a ccTLD or even some TLD
>> operators if it is going to continue to be the protocol coordinator
>> of a single Interoperable Internet.
>>
>> But if it does not breach these relationships one can just see the
>> level of litigation from human rights and dissident groups which
>> could be brought against ICANN if it does adopt these principles
>> without amendment.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/27/15 3:34 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA256
>>>
>>> Hi Paul,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry for responding this late. Please find my response inline:
>>>
>>> On 10/20/2015 04:09 AM, Paul Twomey wrote:
>>>> Niels
>>>>
>>>> I am again confronted with the challenge of understanding exactly
>>>> what these broadly stated proposals mean.
>>>>
>>> We did our best to be precise, but maybe we haven't sufficiently
>>> succeeded. Could you please point our which proposals or
>>> recommendation (in the report) you mean with 'these broadly stated
>>> proposals'?
>>>
>>>> Does your paper just refer to the process within ICANN of creating
>>>> policy - or does it apply to the application of that policy?
>>>>
>>> As the paper described, a human rights review could be part of the
>>> Policy Develop Process. But to have a full human rights report, the
>>> impact of ICANN's policies and operations should be assessed.
>>>
>>>> For instance, concerning specific ICANN necessary functions would
>>>> you be able to tell me how the process recommended in this paper
>>>> would apply to the GAC principles on redelgation of ccTLDs or the
>>>> ccNSO process which has been underway on redelgations? These are
>>>> both products of policy making processes.
>>>>
>>> The report recommends a way forward, based on international best
>>> practices, for creating a human rights policy, the content of the
>>> policy and how it would be implemented is of course up for discussion
>>> in an appropriate process.
>>>
>>>> Does it mean that freedom of expression has to be an overriding
>>>> principle in these cases - and if so how do you see
>>>> operationalizing that?
>>> I don't think this was mentioned or implied anywhere in the report.
>>> Rights need to be balanced, the challenge is to come up with a
>>> framework to do this in the best way.
>>>
>>>> If a government, operating clearly under its laws, requests the
>>>> redelegation of ccTLD from one body to another because the new law
>>>> empowers the government to get information about domain name
>>>> registrants from the new body and to order the new body to remove
>>>> registrations on instructions from the government (I know of at
>>>> least 2 examples just like this happening in the last 10 years) and
>>>> if such a request is consistent with the GAC principles etc, it
>>>> seems to me that your paper implies that ICANN would be required to
>>>> either deny this request or require that the existing policy
>>>> processes be changed.
>>>>
>>>> Have I got it right? Or is it just that in the policy development
>>>> process all who wanted to participate had the freedom to express
>>>> their views?
>>>>
>>> The latter is the case.
>>>
>>>> Please understand that I also think that we should try to hold
>>>> ICANN to human rights standards but I remain concerned that as soon
>>>> as the Ruggles Principles emerge as the answer I keep finding
>>>> related party issues which could really destabilize the whole ICANN
>>>> mission.
>>>>
>>> Am very happy to discuss this with you, you mentioned this before, but
>>> I am still a bit unclear which part of the Ruggie principles could
>>> potentially destabilize ICANN.
>>>
>>>> The bottom line is that ICANN has to support EVERY ccTLD and TLD
>>>> operator if we are going to have a single interoperable Internet.
>>>> It is not like a business - a business can agree not to do business
>>>> in a particular country. ICANN will not be able to do so and
>>>> fulfill its mission.
>>> I think it is crucial for an organization to know and show where there
>>> are (risk for) human rights abuses in relation to their operations and
>>> think about ways how these can be re-mediated or improved upon, this
>>> by no way automatically means that ICANN cannot do x or y or engage
>>> with a specific country or business.
>>>
>>> There are also other bodies that have done this, such as the
>>> International Bar Association.
>>>
>>>> I look forward to your response.
>>>>
>>> Again, sorry for the late reply, am looking forward to your thoughts.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Niels
>>>
>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/19/15 9:26 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote: Dear Paul,
>>>>
>>>> This was indeed meant to inform WP4 on the activity in the CCWP-HR
>>>> and give an example of what the considerations and work in WS2
>>>> might look like.
>>>>
>>>> Looking forward to hear your comments and/or questions.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Niels
>>>>
>>>> On 10/19/2015 09:10 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it is informational. Explains many of the things we
>>>>>>> have been discussing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is the output of a parallel work effort and is meant to
>>>>>>> inform.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> avri
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 19-Oct-15 00:58, Paul Twomey wrote:
>>>>>>>> Sorry Niels
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not attending Dublin. Can you please inform me how
>>>>>>>> this document fits within the work of Working Party 4?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/18/15 2:19 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Dear WP4 members,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's with great pleasure that I send you the the report
>>>>>>>>> prepared by the CCWP-HR on ICANN’s Corporate
>>>>>>>>> Responsibility to respect Human Rights: Recommendations
>>>>>>>>> for developing Human Rights Review Process and
>>>>>>>>> Reporting.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The report will be presented and discussed during our
>>>>>>>>> session on Wednesday October 21 at 9:00 in Wicklow MR5 or
>>>>>>>>> via remote participation [0] for which you all have been
>>>>>>>>> invited.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I trust this report will help further the discussion on
>>>>>>>>> how ICANN can live up to its responsibility to respect
>>>>>>>>> human rights.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to discuss.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Niels
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PS Feel free to spread the report widely. it can also be
>>>>>>>>> found on the website of the CCWP-HR:
>>>>>>>>> https://tinyurl.com/cchumanrights
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [0]
>>>>>>>>> https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/wed-ccwp-human-ri
>>> ght
>>> s-morning
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Wp4 mailing list Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>>>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>>>>>>> -- Dr Paul Twomey Managing Director Argo P at cific
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> US Cell: +1 310 279 2366 Aust M: +61 416 238 501
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> www.argopacific.com <http://www.argopacific.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ Wp4 mailing
>>>>>>>> list Wp4 at icann.org
>>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>>>>>> --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast
>>>>>>> antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ Wp4 mailing
>>>>>>> list Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>>>>>>
>>>> -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
>>>>
>>>> Article 19 www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>>>>
>>>> PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D
>>>> 68E9
>>>>> _______________________________________________ Wp4 mailing list
>>>>> Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>> - -- Niels ten Oever
>>> Head of Digital
>>>
>>> Article 19
>>> www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>>>
>>> PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>>> 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> Version: GnuPG v2
>>>
>>> iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWLlYIAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpyqMH/jpSWGVUXhGgNaEbIqn2qW8q
>>> 3FhfkV6kPj/ovZXsZRcwIJHVJ25EmIcy4ROMggtGmfSQBYIs+jiJggbt+ZQgvTOb
>>> BkiYBEDIhU5ohBX/UTaJ5rIN04FHk70+q2T2DkYLlDIA32UewiSsK79l99Ejo9zr
>>> oPy+Cjin225ifcUh6Tdx78zkNa7p7DX/YVC/dMFww1yfsa7gJwuStufyIZVLz7Wr
>>> 9JPpNWs6WB5EIU/6n3wExeeoqWllrOcANsw8efTdFfzxBuoMHr0u7P6VptHrRGhT
>>> kXVsA9JL9ir/W4XS/lg1F0VmfW1ff2RIzGLlGRd/7jWq0P92d0eRXbK7SadcE9M=
>>> =207Z
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wp4 mailing list
>>> Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>
>> --
>> Dr Paul Twomey
>> Managing Director
>> Argo P at cific
>>
>> US Cell: +1 310 279 2366
>> Aust M: +61 416 238 501
>>
>> www.argopacific.com <http://www.argopacific.com/>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wp4 mailing list
>> Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>
--
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/wp4/attachments/20151030/d175f115/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Wp4
mailing list