[Ws2-hr] [CCWG-ACCT] HR subgroup question to CCWG plenary
Nigel Roberts
nigel at channelisles.net
Wed Jan 4 22:05:49 UTC 2017
This may help
http://www.journallegalwritinginstitute.org/archives/1996/lec.pdf
On 04/01/17 22:00, Greg Shatan wrote:
> 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
> <mailto: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:
>
> o Developing an FOI-HR for the Bylaw.
> o Considering which specific Human Rights conventions or other
> instruments should be used by ICANN in interpreting and
> implementing the Bylaw.
> o Considering the policies and frameworks, if any, that ICANN
> needs to develop or enhance in order to fulfill its
> commitment to respect Human Rights.
> o 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.
> o Considering what effect, if any, this Bylaw will have on
> ICANN’s consideration of advice given by the GAC.
> o 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
> o 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 <mailto: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 <mailto:Ws2-hr at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr>
>
>
>
More information about the Ws2-hr
mailing list