[Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC
Aikman-Scalese, Anne
AAikman at lrrc.com
Mon Sep 19 17:34:28 UTC 2016
Thanks Seun. A very good question as to procedure. I think it is implied that if the Board then implements such a policy without due consideration, this becomes a basis for a Request for Reconsideration and/or IRP so that is why we must consider these existing processes within ICANN as delineated in Annex 6.
Anne
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>
_____________________________
[cid:image003.png at 01D21261.65DB1530]
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/>
From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 11:06 AM
To: John Curran
Cc: ws2-hr at icann.org; Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC
FWIW, I like the three focus areas enumerated by John. I think it makes a lot of sense as it's only addressing HR issues during the PDP and not post PDP. In essence, it's only the text of a final policy that implementers would need to comply with and be accountable to.
While I understand that details of this would still need to be fleshed out, a devil that I foresee is when for some reason the HR concerns did not influence a policy proposal before it becomes final, would there be any grounds for HR violation if the policy proceeds? Ofcourse no need to response now but I hope the detailed response of that would result to a NO.
Regards
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 17 Sep 2016 9:47 p.m., "John Curran" <jcurran at istaff.org<mailto:jcurran at istaff.org>> wrote:
Anne -
I believe that we should (at a minimum) seek to improve ICANN’s policy development
and implementation activities with respect to potential HR issues by:
1) Clearly defining what HR Convention(s) that will be considered applicable to its activities,
2) Provide a straightforward method for any party to raise a concern during the policy
development process or during any ICANN consultation (to cover operational matters)
that the intended policy or process would pose a threat to one or more human rights
contained within the agreed list of HR Conventions, and
3) that raising such Human Right concern would in turn require that the final policy or
process outcome be amended to directly acknowledge the raised concern and either
include appropriate changes or provide a clear explanation of why the concern is either
not relevant or is deemed a reasonable balance in light of ICANN’s overall obligations.
If we do that (and do it well) we will have created an FOI-HR framework that it is both useful
and yet operating fully within ICANN’s existing mission and mandate.
/John
p.s. my views alone - apologies to the electrons who labored to carry these thoughts all
over the planet.
On Sep 13, 2016, at 7:08 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>> wrote:
Another practical consideration to review as FOI-HR is being developed: Would registries get extra points in the application process for making Human Rights Public Interest Commitments? Does an HR PIC complaint and ICANN’s subsequent determination of whether such HR PIC is being met by the registry put it in the content regulation business?
I think Andrew pointed out on the call that it is a good idea to consider what we are trying to fix or promote. Does “respect” just mean “avoid adverse impact” or does it mean something more, e.g. “reward positive impact”. Shall we define the word “respect” in the FOI-HR?
Anne
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>
_____________________________
<image005.png>
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/>
From: ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 3:29 PM
To: 'Kavouss Arasteh'
Cc: ws2-hr at icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC
Dear Kavouss,
I do not understand why you object to even discussing the issue of how FOI – HR relates to the Policy Development Process and GAC Policy Advice. If everyone is content to know that the FOI-HR will not apply to any Registry contract prior to development of Consensus Policy via a PDP or Expedited PDP, then that is quite alright with me. I am just pointing out that this is the path we are heading down.
I think it would be smarter to engage stakeholders broadly and earlier – that is, in the form of GAC public policy advice and GNSO guidance (at the very least) in the drafting of the Framework itself. If we do so early on, then a “go-ahead” from the Chartering Organizations will be much easier to obtain later.
As was pointed out by someone else on the call, we also need to make a recommendation – in the Framework – as to whether or not it may serve as a basis for a Request for Reconsideration or an IRP, which is certainly implied by the drafting in the new By-Laws. Again, I think it would be wiser to obtain GAC public policy advice and GNSO Guidance on this point now rather than later (when we think our work is done.)
The following tasks are set out for our group:
<image003.png>
Anne
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428 office
520.879.4725 fax
AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>
_____________________________
<image004.png>
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/>
From: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 1:48 PM
To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Cc: Niels ten Oever; ws2-hr at icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC
Dear Anne
What you are saying may be right but this is outside our terms of reference.
We have to establish the draft Recommendation(s) on the FOI relating to Human Rights and submit that to CCWG .Once adopted by CCWG then it will be probably put into public comments
After the Recommendation(s) are finalized it7 they will be submitted to ICANN and thus it is up to ICANN to deal with that.
Should ICANN decides that parts of all of that should be subject to PDP,it is ICANN decision and policy.
Consequently, we should not be involved in the necessity or otherwise of developing PDP or recommending the need or otherwise of PDP.
Should there be any doubt on that the chair should raise this point at the next meeting of CCWG Plenary.
In view of the above, I strongly disagree with the inclusion of the item in the agenda as an agreed item
Regards
Kavouss
2016-09-13 22:18 GMT+02:00 Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>>:
Having said that Human Rights FOI could be introduced in the Subsequent Procedures PDP currently underway but might happen faster via its own Expedited PDP. This is only important if you want to bind registries. Please note that ICANN applicable law in this regard does not automatically apply to registries.
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428<tel:520.629.4428> office
520.879.4725<tel:520.879.4725> fax
AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/>
-----Original Message-----
From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 1:08 PM
To: 'Niels ten Oever'; ws2-hr at icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr at icann.org>
Subject: RE: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC
Dear all,
I hope that everyone understands that no provision re Human Rights can be added to a Registry Contract unless developed via Consensus Policy. Consensus Policy is a strictly defined term. (These are the only provisions which may be added unilaterally by ICANN.) Further, the ONLY method of developing Consensus Policy is pursuant to either a full Policy Development Process or else an Expedited Policy Development Process.
So if you think you can adopt a Ruggie principle of ICANN addressing Human Rights in all its business relationships, you must also apply the Ruggie 18 b principle and understand that NO REGISTRY IS BOUND BY ANYTHING OTHER THAN CONSENSUS POLICY (and applicable law of the jurisdiction where the Registry is based.)
Anne
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
520.629.4428<tel:520.629.4428> office
520.879.4725<tel:520.879.4725> fax
AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>
_______________________________
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
lrrc.com<http://lrrc.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: Monday, September 12, 2016 11:15 PM
To: ws2-hr at icann.org<mailto:ws2-hr at icann.org>
Subject: [Ws2-hr] Proposed Agenda for call September 13 1900 UTC
Dear all,
Please find underneath the proposed agenda for the call for September 13
1900 UTC.
Please let me know if you would like to add, amend or remove any agenda points.
1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Final Discussion on: Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human rights during WS1 (attached and here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNMoZb4/edit?usp=sharing
)
3. General Discussion & Q&A on Ruggie Principles and Ruggie FIFA report (attached and here:
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/content/download/79736/1789834/version
/1/file/Ruggie_humanrightsFIFA_reportApril2016.pdf<https://www.hks.harvard.edu/content/download/79736/1789834/version/1/file/Ruggie_humanrightsFIFA_reportApril2016.pdf> )
4. Discussion on: Analysis of Ruggie Principles for ICANN – Short presentation by Drafting Volunteershttps://docs.google.com/document/d/10XMIVosuEfgmXwr7SQjeNLKI8r_hdONrJNV2ih72V80/edit
5. AOB
Looking forward to the call.
Best,
Niels
--
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
________________________________
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<mailto:Ws2-hr at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
________________________________
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.
________________________________
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<mailto:Ws2-hr at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
_______________________________________________
Ws2-hr mailing list
Ws2-hr at icann.org<mailto:Ws2-hr at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
________________________________
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20160919/cd261096/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6488 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20160919/cd261096/image003-0001.png>
More information about the Ws2-hr
mailing list