[Ws2-hr] [CCWG-ACCT] HR subgroup question to CCWG plenary

Wed Jan 4 22:00:32 UTC 2017

On the second issue raised, I agree with Brett that the "if any" modifies
the phrase "specific Human Rights conventions or other instruments," and
not merely the "other instruments" part of that phrase.

If I asked you "What salad or soup, if any, would you like as an
appetizer?", I don't think you would assume that you are definitely getting
salad (whether you like it or not) and your option not to have a dish is
limited to declining the soup.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:

> All,
>
> The first issue raised in this thread is a fact question with regard to
> what Annex 6 and Annex 12 actually say.  I've gone back and looked at the
> Final Report and Annexes, dated February 23. Unfortunately, based on this
> review, there appear to be some errors in the email.  It appears that an
> earlier version of CCWG Final Report and Annexes might have been used to
> grab the text quoted in the email.
>
> In Annex 6, *Paragraph 28* (not *Paragraph 14*) contains the operative
> language.  It is almost, but not quite, the same as the language quoted in
> the email.  In either case, the paragraph does not contain the "if any"
> identified by Brett Schaeffer.  This paragraph is part of a section
> entitled "Detailed Explanation of Recommendations," in a subsection
> entitled "Operationalizing the Commitment to Respect Human Rights."
>  However, this paragraph is probably not the right one to quote from Annex
> 6, as there is another similar paragraph (*Paragraph 7*) in Annex 6, but
> it's in the section entitled "CCWG-Accountability Recommendations,"  which
> would seem to make it more authoritative than Paragraph 28.  Paragraph 7
> *does* contain the "if any" identified by Brett.
>
> Paragraph 7 reads as follows:
>
> o   Include the following in Work Stream 2 activities:
>
> §  Develop an FOI-HR for the Human Rights Bylaw.
>
> §  Consider which specific Human Rights conventions or other instruments,
> if any, should be used by ICANN in interpreting and implementing the Human
> Rights Bylaw.
>
> §  Consider the policies and frameworks, if any, that ICANN needs to
> develop or enhance in order to fulfill its commitment to respect Human
> Rights.
>
> §  Consistent with ICANN’s existing processes and protocols, consider how
> these new frameworks should be discussed and drafted to ensure broad
> multistakeholder involvement in the process.
>
> §  Consider what effect, if any, this Bylaw will have on ICANN’s
> consideration of advice given by the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC).
>
> §  Consider how, if at all, this Bylaw will affect how ICANN’s operations
> are carried out.
>
> §  Consider how the interpretation and implementation of this Bylaw will
> interact with existing and future ICANN policies and procedures.
>
>
> Paragraph 28 reads as follows:
>
> 28      The Human Rights-related activities to be addressed in Work
> Stream 2 are:
>
>
>    - Developing an FOI-HR for the Bylaw.
>       - Considering which specific Human Rights conventions or other
>       instruments should be used by ICANN in interpreting and implementing the
>       Bylaw.
>       - Considering the policies and frameworks, if any, that ICANN needs
>       to develop or enhance in order to fulfill its commitment to respect Human
>       Rights.
>       - Considering how these new frameworks should be discussed and
>       drafted to ensure broad multistakeholder involvement in the process,
>       consistent with ICANN’s existing processes and protocols.
>       - Considering what effect, if any, this Bylaw will have on ICANN’s
>       consideration of advice given by the GAC.
>       - Considering how, if at all, this Bylaw will affect how ICANN’s
>       operations are carried out once an FOI-HR is developed by the
>       CCWG-Accountability as a consensus recommendation in Work Stream 2
>       (including Chartering Organizations’ approval) and the FOI-HR is approved
>       by the ICANN Board using the same process and criteria it has committed to
>       use to consider the Work Stream 1 recommendations
>       - Considering how the interpretation and implementation of this
>       Bylaw will interact with existing and future ICANN policies and procedures.
>
> It appears that the "if any" was added to Paragraph 7 in the CCWG draft of
> February 17, but the conforming change to paragraph 28 was never made.
>
> Annex 12 is also not accurately quoted.  In the final version, *Paragraph
> 24* (not *Paragraph 18*) *does* contain the "if any" identified by
> Brett.  Paragraph 24 differs slightly from the quoted Paragraph 18 in other
> ways as well.  It reads:
>
> 24      To ensure that adding the proposed Human Rights Bylaw provision
> into the ICANN Bylaws does not lead to an expansion of ICANN’s Mission or
> scope, the CCWG -Accountability will develop a Framework of Interpretation
> for Human Rights (FOI-HR) as a consensus recommendation in Work Stream 2 to
> be approved by the ICANN Board using the same process and criteria as for
> Work Stream 1 recommendations, and the Bylaw provision will not enter into
> force before the FOI-HR is in place. The CCWG-Accountability will consider
> the following as it develops the FOI-HR:
>
> ·           Consider which specific Human Rights conventions or other
> instruments, if any, should be used by ICANN in interpreting and
> implementing the Human Rights Bylaw.
>
> ·           Consider the policies and frameworks, if any, that ICANN
> needs to develop or enhance in order to fulfill its commitment to respect
> Human Rights.
>
> ·           Consistent with ICANN’s existing processes and protocols,
> consider how these new frameworks should be discussed and drafted to ensure
> broad multistakeholder involvement in the process.
>
> ·           Consider what effect, if any, this Bylaw would have on
> ICANN’s consideration of advice given by the Governmental Advisory
> Committee (GAC).
>
> ·           Consider how, if at all, this Bylaw will affect how ICANN’s
> operations are carried out.
>
> ·           Consider how the interpretation and implementation of this
> Bylaw will interact with existing and future ICANN policies and procedures.
>
> It probably makes sense to send a revised letter with accurate quotations
> to the CCWG-Plenary, which doesn't meet for another week.  I'm happy to
> prepare one and circulate it to the group.
>
> Apologies for the length of this email, but it's mostly quotes.
>
> Greg
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Just because you insist on something doesn't make you right.
>>>>
>>>
>> There's a saying in panto, which is traditional in this country at this
>> time of year:  "OH YES, IT DOES!"
>>
>> Actually, however, indeed, no, it doesn't.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Man (Michael Palin): An argument isn't just contradiction.
>>>
>>> Mr. Vibrating (John Cleese): It can be.
>>>
>>> Man: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements
>>> intended to establish a proposition.
>>>
>>> Mr. Vibrating: No it isn't.
>>>
>>> Man: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
>>>
>>> Mr. Vibrating: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary
>>> position.
>>>
>>> Man: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
>>>
>>> Mr. Vibrating: Yes it is!
>>>
>>> Man: No it isn't!
>>>
>>> Man: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the
>>> automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
>>>
>>> (short pause)
>>>
>>> Mr. Vibrating: No it isn't.
>>>
>>> Man: It is.
>>>
>>> Mr. Vibrating: Not at all.
>>>
>>> Man: Now look!.                 (MONTY PYTHON: THE ARGUMENT CLINIC)
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20170104/d1557f03/attachment-0001.html>