[Ws2-hr] New Draft Text for FoI

[Greg Shatan]

First, as a fellow rapporteur I understand the need to move forward, and to
create something to react to.  I do feel however that we are jumping the
gun.

I would like to sign on to the concerns expressed by Bastiaan, who in turn
is citing the concerns of Matthew and Tatiana.

Based on our discussions so far, we have no consensus on whether, to what
extent, or how any of the UNGPs might be applied.  Yet the document seems
to start from the opposite assumption.  That concerns me, as I don't think
that makes the process shorter but rather complicates our process.

I'll paste in a statement that I made in comments to the document
(apologies for not providing context):

We are not merely seeing "where specific problems may be identified."  That
is tantamount to assuming the UNGPs are in, unless "problems can be
identified."  We are not operating under any such assumption.  If anything,
we are operating under the opposite assumption.  We are seeing where the
UNGPs can be applied to our work.  In other words, no part of the UNGPs are
in, unless there is consensus that they are in.  Furthermore, there is no
assumption that we are taking all or any part of the UNGP "as is" as
opposed to being revised, modified, limited, etc.

Greg

On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 4:36 AM, <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch> wrote:

> Sorry, I forgot to add that I have included a series of comments in the
> Google doc - hope they are helpful
> Regards
> Jorge
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org] Im
> Auftrag von Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Oktober 2016 10:06
> An: lists at nielstenoever.net
> Cc: ws2-hr at icann.org
> Betreff: Re: [Ws2-hr] New Draft Text for FoI
>
> Dear Niels
>
> thanks for this constructive and useful first draft on the issue.
>
> best
>
> Jorge
>
> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
>
> > Am 03.10.2016 um 17:07 schrieb Niels ten Oever <lists at nielstenoever.net
> >:
> >
> > 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_0vm6oKxhIWZ47L7lxcFKUBHVn
> > kBYUOsA2Q/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 <ICANN Bylaws Commentary
> > Table.doc> _______________________________________________
> > Ws2-hr mailing list
> > Ws2-hr at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-hr mailing list
> Ws2-hr at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161004/79fbfa3f/attachment.html>