[Ws2-hr] Report to CCWG

Niels ten Oever lists at nielstenoever.net
Thu Oct 20 08:20:21 UTC 2016


Dear Greg,

> 
> More generally, I would like to comment on the Supplemental Report that
> is attached to your email, but you have granted "view only" access.
>  _Can you please give "comment" access to the Supplemental Report Google
> document?_  I have a number of concerns that are best addressed in the
> document itself.  Thanks.
> 

We have already agreed to this document several calls ago, after three
readings. I would be very hesitant to reopen the discussion on this
document.

Best,

Niels



> Greg
> 
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Paul McGrady <policy at paulmcgrady.com
> <mailto:policy at paulmcgrady.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Thanks Niels.  By saying the group has reached some sort of
>     consensus that
>     certain Ruggie principals may apply, you are already including
>     overviews of
>     the various views of the members of the group.  I, for one, still
>     have no
>     idea if any of the Ruggie principals would apply since I do not know
>     whether
>     or not they are already subsumed by or preempted by California State
>     law.  I
>     hope your summary will be complete enough to include that at least one
>     person in the group believes we out to start with what applicable law is
>     already in place before we begin opining on whether or not third party
>     sources should govern ICANN behavior, since the bylaw makes it clear
>     that
>     all of our work should end up with a product that is within
>     applicable law.
>     We simply have no hope at hitting the target if we insist on having
>     blinders
>     on.  Not telling the Plenary CCWG that we have decided to put on
>     blinders is
>     an important thing for them to know so that they can either tell us
>     to take
>     off the blinders and look first at what human rights requirements
>     already
>     exist under applicable law or they can consent to us trying to put the
>     puzzle together in the dark.
> 
>     As far as my suggestions for next steps, they remain the same as the
>     first
>     (among many) times I have brought up this subject.  Ask ICANN Legal what
>     Human Rights laws already apply to the organization.  They have been
>     operating in California for some time now and they already know the
>     answer
>     to this question.
> 
>     Best,
>     Paul
> 
> 
>     Paul D. McGrady, Jr.
>     policy at paulmcgrady.com <mailto:policy at paulmcgrady.com>
> 
> 
> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: Niels ten Oever [mailto:lists at nielstenoever.net
>     <mailto:lists at nielstenoever.net>]
>     Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 11:24 AM
>     To: Paul McGrady <policy at paulmcgrady.com
>     <mailto:policy at paulmcgrady.com>>; ws2-hr at icann.org
>     <mailto:ws2-hr at icann.org>
>     Cc: thomas at rickert.net <mailto:thomas at rickert.net>
>     Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Report to CCWG
> 
>     Hi Paul,
> 
>     I am a bit hesitant to add an overview of different views of members
>     of the
>     group, but I will try.
> 
>     In the meantime I would still be very interested to hear from you
>     how you
>     think we could approach this, with the limited resources of our
>     group and in
>     conjunction with the current understanding of applicable law we're
>     working
>     on.
> 
>     Best,
> 
>     Niels
> 
>     On 10/19/2016 05:31 PM, Paul McGrady wrote:
>     > Thanks Niels.  I would like for your summary to include notice that I
>     > have consistently called for us to evaluate what human rights
>     > principles already apply to ICANN as a result of applicable California
>     > law in order to get a baseline to begin a gap analysis, but that the
>     > request has not been acted upon by the group.  Thanks.
>     >
>     > Best,
>     > Paul
>     >
>     >
>     > Paul D. McGrady, Jr.
>     > policy at paulmcgrady.com <mailto:policy at paulmcgrady.com>
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > -----Original Message-----
>     > From: ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org <mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org>
>     [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org <mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org>] On
>     > Behalf Of Niels ten Oever
>     > Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 11:24 AM
>     > To: ws2-hr at icann.org <mailto:ws2-hr at icann.org>
>     > Subject: [Ws2-hr] Report to CCWG
>     >
>     > Dear all,
>     >
>     > I hope this email finds you well. Coming Friday is the deadline for me
>     > to report to the CCWG Plenary on the progress of our Subgroup. I
>     > drafted the text underneath. Your input is more than welcome before
>     > Friday, when I will submit it to the CCWG co-chairs.
>     >
>     > All your input is of course very much appreciated.
>     >
>     > Best,
>     >
>     > Niels
>     >
>     > 1. Executive Summary
>     > The CCWG WS2 Human Rights Subgroup has documented the historical
>     > context of the discussions on ICANNs human rights bylaw, which
>     > together with the CCWG report (especially Annex 6 and 12) form it's
>     > scope of discussion, with a Framework of Interpretation of the Human
>     Rights Bylaw as intended output.
>     > The subgroup is currently preparing a Framework of Interpretation
>     > which in due time will be presented to the CCWG plenary for
>     discussion.
>     >
>     > 2. Description of the Issue
>     > 2.1 Current State of Play
>     > The CCWG WS2 Human Rights Subgroup started of with providing an
>     > overview of the discussions and agreements as they were made during
>     > CCWG Workstream 1 [0]. Subsequently the Subgroup has analyzed the UN
>     > Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), and their
>     > relevance and applicability for ICANN. While there was consensus that
>     > some principles were relevant for the development for a Framework of
>     > Interpretation (such as 13a and 15a), it was also recognized that the
>     > UNGPs have not been designed with an organization like ICANN in mind.
>     > Therefore a drafting team is currently iteratively designing a draft
>     > Framework of Interpretation which is being discussed in weekly calls.
>     > It is expected, that at this rate, the subgroup will be able to
>     achieve
>     the set milestones.
>     >
>     > 2.2 Supplemental Report
>     > See [0]
>     >
>     > 3 Recommendation
>     > 3.1 Requirements for Recommendation
>     > We haven't reached consensus on a recommendation yet.
>     >
>     > 3.2 Rationale for Recommendation
>     > We haven't reached consensus on a recommendation yet.
>     >
>     > [0]
>     >
>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_
>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_>
>     > M_aNMo
>     > Zb4/edit?usp=sharing
>     >
>     > --
>     > 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
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Ws2-hr mailing list
>     > Ws2-hr at icann.org <mailto:Ws2-hr at icann.org>
>     > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>     <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr>
>     >
> 
>     --
>     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
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Ws2-hr mailing list
>     Ws2-hr at icann.org <mailto:Ws2-hr at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>     <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr>
> 
> 

-- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9


More information about the Ws2-hr mailing list