[Ws2-hr] Fwd: Input from SSAC to the WG on Human Rights

[John Laprise]

Agree with Paul. Seeing as most of the world does not adhere to UNHRC policy
to begin with, this is a non-starter.

Best regards, 

John Laprise, Ph.D.
Consulting Scholar

http://www.linkedin.com/in/jplaprise/




-----Original Message-----
From: ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf
Of Paul Twomey
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 9:43 AM
To: ws2-hr at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ws2-hr] Fwd: Input from SSAC to the WG on Human Rights

Yes Neil.   But think of how does ICANN do a Human Rights Impact 
Assessment on an agreement with a new ccTLD operator in a non-democratic 
(or even democratic) country?    ICANN is not the UN Human Rights 
Council.   It would be explosive.


On 3/13/17 10:38 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Thanks for your response. Reply inline:
>
> On 03/13/2017 03:32 PM, Paul Twomey wrote:
>> Dear Niels
>>
>> I note the SSAC report.   I worry again that its recommendation language
>> calling for a Human Rights Impact Assessment,
>>
>> Microsoft Word -
>> SAC0XX_SSAC_Input_to_CCWG-Acc_WS2_Human_Rights_v1.1-CLEAN.docx
>>
>> "A Human Rights Impact Assessment4 is a process for systematically 
>> identifying, predicting and responding to the potential human rights 
>> impacts of business operations, policies, or agreements."
>>
>> has the possible consequence of inadvertantly trying to impose human 
>> rights tests on agreements in the IANA function, especially as they may
>> apply to agreements (written or explicit) with ccTLD operators.   As I
>> have said consistently in this process, this could be extremely damaging
>> on the operations and global acceptance of the IANA function.   Hence my
>> concern about certain sections of the Ruggie Principles being applied 
>> to ICANN - ICANN does not have the luxury of choosing which parts of 
>> the world it may or may not serve.
>>
>> First and foremost, the first right of humans we need to protect is 
>> having access to an Internet that is global and operates 7x24.
>>
> Isn't that exactly what the SSAC letter says in the first paragraph 
> (as well as the Core Value, and the Framework of Interpretation) ?
>
> Best,
>
> Niels
>
>
>> Best
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/13/17 9:12 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Please find attached the letter we received from SSAC.
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Niels
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> Subject: Input from SSAC to the WG on Human Rights
>>> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 03:12:11 +0100
>>> From: Patrik Fältström <paf at netnod.se>
>>> To: Niels ten Oever <niels at article19.org>
>>> CC: SSAC <ssac at icann.org>, Human Rights <cc-humanrights at icann.org>
>>>
>>> Niels,
>>>
>>> As chair of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee, one of 
>>> the chartering organizations of the CCWG on Accountability, we would 
>>> like to submit the attached comments as fruit for thought for the
discussions.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>>     Patrik Fältström
>>>     Chair of the SSAC
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ws2-hr mailing list
>>> Ws2-hr at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>> --
>> Dr Paul Twomey
>> Managing Director
>> Argo P at cific
>>
>> US Cell: +1 310 279 2366
>> Aust M: +61 416 238 501
>>
>> www.argopacific.com
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ws2-hr mailing list
>> Ws2-hr at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>>

--
Dr Paul Twomey
Managing Director
Argo P at cific

US Cell: +1 310 279 2366
Aust M: +61 416 238 501

www.argopacific.com

_______________________________________________
Ws2-hr mailing list
Ws2-hr at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr