[Ws2-hr] New Draft Text for FoI

[Rudolph Daniel]

Yes thank you.. indeed your red inserts are affording it  degrees of
transparency.
But, gTLDs
Is it general consensus that ICANN, or the empowered community  (which I
thought..post iana contract) becomes ICANN.... should divorce itself from
any notion of any sanction across the gTLD landscape?
rd

On Oct 3, 2016 2:27 PM, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman at lrrc.com> wrote:

> Probably should say something like this in order to be clear and make the
> roles within the organization clear:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Unlike the internationally recognized human rights which legally obligate
> states (see below), the UNGPs do not create new international law
> obligations or limit or undermine any legal obligations a State may have
> (UNGPs, General Principles). This also means that the UNGPs do not require
> enterprises to enforce human rights, which is the legal duty of states.
>
>
> Pursuant to the UNGPs, and consistent with existing processes and
> protocols, including, but not limited to, the MultiStakeholder Bottom-Up
> Policy Development Process, the  ICANN Empowered Community can
> voluntarily express its     commitment to respect human rights, and
> identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how it addresses adverse human
> rights impacts through the process of human rights due diligence. In doing
> so, the ICANN Empowered Community can prioritize areas of focus, such as
> ICANN operations, internal procedures, and/or new policy, consistent with
> ICANN’s  Mission. In addition, while operational level grievance
> mechanisms may be established to address human rights grievances for
> internal matters, no such mechanism shall apply for the purpose of
> enforcing claims of  human rights violations  against third parties or as
> between one party and another party.
>
>
>
> ICANN’s commitment to apply the UNGPs to its operations and policies in
> the foregoing manner is consistent with the letter and the spirit of the
> human rights provision of the bylaws as well as with the UNGPs.  Unless
> required by applicable law, all human rights policies shall be developed
> pursuant to the MultiStakeholder Model bottom-up process and shall be
> effective upon subsequent adoption by the ICANN Board.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The above assumes that my idea for a Human Rights Objection process to new
> gTLD applications is toast.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese*
>
> Of Counsel
>
> 520.629.4428 office
>
> 520.879.4725 fax
>
> AAikman at lrrc.com
>
> _____________________________
>
> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
>
> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
>
> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
>
> lrrc.com
>
>
>
> *From:* ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Schaefer, Brett
> *Sent:* Monday, October 03, 2016 8:56 AM
> *To:* Niels ten Oever; ws2-hr at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-hr] New Draft Text for FoI
>
>
>
> Niels,
>
>
>
> I wanted to highlight this statement in the document:
>
>
>
> “Pursuant to the UNGPs, ICANN can voluntarily express its commitment to
> respect human rights, and identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how
> it addresses adverse human rights impacts through the process of human
> rights due diligence. In doing so, ICANN can prioritize areas of focus,
> such as its operations, internal procedures, and/or new policy, consistent
> with its Mission. In addition, operational level grievance mechanisms
> should be established to address human rights grievances.
>
>
>
> ICANN’s commitment to apply the UNGPs to its operations and policies in
> the foregoing manner is consistent with the letter and the spirit of the
> human rights provision of the bylaws as well as with the UNGPs.”
>
>
>
> And
>
>
>
> “As stated above, application of the human rights Core Value does not
> create any legal obligation of ICANN outside its Mission. It is assumed
> that it is implicit in ICANN’s Mission that it will operate within the
> bounds of applicable laws; furthermore, it is also assumed that ICANN has
> the discretion to voluntarily make commitments to respect human rights and
> to carry out human rights due diligence.”
>
>
>
> The text of the human rights core value states: “This Core Value does not
> create, and shall not be interpreted to create, any obligation on ICANN
> outside its Mission, or beyond obligations found in applicable law. This
> Core Value does not obligate ICANN to enforce its human rights obligations,
> or the human rights obligations of other parties, against other parties.”
>
>
>
> The text quoted above from the draft FoI seems to be proposing a that
> because ICANN would be “voluntarily” identifying, preventing, mitigating
> and accounting for adverse human rights impacts, that these commitments
> would not be inconsistent with the text of the new bylaws and that it would
> differ from an “obligation”.
>
>
>
> Is that correct?
>
>
>
> Brett
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Brett* *Schaefer*
>
> * Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security
> and Foreign Policy*
> The Heritage Foundation
> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
> Washington, DC 20002
> 202-608-6097
> heritage.org
>
> *From:* ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org
> <ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Niels ten Oever
> *Sent:* Monday, October 03, 2016 11:07 AM
> *To:* ws2-hr at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Ws2-hr] New Draft Text for FoI
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I hope this e-mail finds you well. To ensure nothing of our constructive
> discussions is getting lost, and to help us continue to be very
> concrete, I would like to share with you the attached document, that can
> also be found here (page 2 onwards):
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1emqmzyB9_
> 0vm6oKxhIWZ47L7lxcFKUBHVnkBYUOsA2Q/edit
>
> The document aims to represent a sedimentation of our discussion and
> suggest a way forward, by providing potential text for the Framework of
> Interpretation. Partially inspired by the reaction of John Ruggie when I
> brought up our concerns with him.
>
> I hope this proves to be useful, and I am more than happy to discuss it
> with you all on the list and the call, and of course work on suggestions
> and comments in the Google Doc.
>
> Best,
>
> Niels
>
>
> --
> Niels ten Oever
> Head of Digital
>
> Article 19
> www.article19.org
>
> PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
> 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>
> ------------------------------
>
> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
> individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this
> message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or
> agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended
> recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
> copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you
> have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
> replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any
> attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and
> confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-hr mailing list
> Ws2-hr at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20161003/0daaa654/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6496 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20161003/0daaa654/image002-0001.png>