[Ws2-hr] dissenting opinion - final version for transmittal to CCWG plenary

Tue Sep 5 06:20:46 UTC 2017

All,

I think it would be helpful to review the course of events under discussion
here and in the minority statement.  I've taken the time to comb through
the email list and the relevant meeting transcripts, and as far as I can
determine, this is what took place.  I'll provide this without further
comment, but I hope it is useful to all members of the Subgroup.

1.  Niels made a request for volunteers to join a drafting team on the
August 8, 2017 Working Group call.  Attendance records show that Kavouss
Arasteh and Mark Carvell were on the call (the latter as an Observer).
Three people on the call (David Macauley, myself and Tatiana Tropina)
volunteered for the drafting team.  Anne also apparently volunteered, but
this was not noted in the call notes; this was subsequently clarified.

2.  Almost directly after the call (or possibly even during the end of the
call), Niels sent to the subgroup list an email with two versions of the
paragraph in question ("Original text" and "Text proposed by me on the
call"), and said "I am greatly looking forward to the suggestion of the
drafting team."

3.  Matthew Shears replied to that thread a couple of hours later and
volunteered to be on the drafting team.  Rudy Daniel, Anne Aikman-Scalese
and Kavouss Arasteh also replied to that thread, with contributions.  Rudy
also sent a follow-on email with further observations; David responded to
this.

4.  Within a few hours after that, MSSI Secretariat sent an email to both
the CCWG and ws2-hr lists with Action Items and raw captioning from the
August 8 meeting.  The second Action Item from the meeting was:

   -
*DM, GS, TT volunteer for drafting team for the two elements of text which
   were discussed on the call this week  for consideration at the next
   meeting.*

5.  The next day, David sent another email on the topic, again to the full
subgroup list.  Kavouss, Anne and Steve DelBianco all replied to this
email, discussing various aspects and options for the text.

6.  Meanwhile, Anne sent an email directly after the call with some
thoughts on the language of this paragraph, to which there were numerous
responses by eight different members of the subgroup (Kavouss,  Tijani,
Steve, Rudy, Brett, Bastiaan, Seun and David) over the next couple of days.

7.  Members of the drafting team took note of these discussions on the list
and then put together a suggested revised text to be discussed by the
Subgroup.

8.  On August 15, the date set to return a text to the list, David Macauley
on behalf of the Drafting Team sent a suggested text to the full list for
the Subgroup to consider.  Brett and Anne (who had not yet seen the very
final suggested text due to time zone differences) responded in support of
the suggested text.  Jorge and Kavouss responded, objecting to the
suggested text.

9.  There were also responses to Niels' agenda email to the list,
commenting on the suggested text -- Brett, Matthew, Rudy, and Anne in
support; Jorge and Kavouss objecting.

10.  This suggested text was then discussed on the August 15 call.  The
decision on that call, as reported in the post-call email from MSSI
Secretariat, was:

   - The modifications proposed by the drafting team were not supported and
   as such are rejected. The original text used in the public consultation
   will be used.

Only David Macauley and Tatiana Tropina were present from the drafting
team. Anne, Matthew and I were unable to attend. Kavouss was on the call
and participated actively in the discussion of the revised text.  Mark
Carvell was present as an Observer.

11.  At the following meeting on August 22, there was no further
discussion of the drafting team's text.  There was a second reading of the
cover email to be sent to the Plenary with the Subgroup's report, including
the language used to characterize the Subgroup's response to comments
suggesting that the UNGP be expressly mentioned.  There was also a lengthy
discussion of procedural matters relating to the minority statement
submitted by Jorge.

Best regards,

Greg

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com>
wrote:

> Thanks Jorge.  You may recall that in one version of the revised
> “Considerations” language proposed by me on the list, I included a specific
> reference to ICANN the organisation using the assessment tool specified in
> Ruggie Principle 18(b).  This suggestion was rejected by the rest of the
> drafting team.  As far as I know, there were not  separate drafting team
> calls and everyone participated on the list and proposed language on the
> general list.
>
>
>
> I am not certain how the final language arose, but in the end I elected to
> support it.  I do think that if either Kavouss or you as active members
> would have chosen to become drafting team members, the language might have
> been better.
>
>
>
> Thank you
>
> Anne
>
>
>
> *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese*
>
> Of Counsel
>
> 520.629.4428 <(520)%20629-4428> office
>
> 520.879.4725 <(520)%20879-4725> fax
>
> AAikman at lrrc.com
>
> _____________________________
>
> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
>
> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700
>
> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
>
> lrrc.com
>
>
>
> *From:* ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces at icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 31, 2017 9:04 AM
> *To:* lists at nielstenoever.net
> *Cc:* thiago.jardim at itamaraty.gov.br; ws2-hr at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Ws2-hr] dissenting opinion - final version for transmittal to
> CCWG plenary
>
>
>
> Dear Niels,
>
>
>
> As anticipated, please find hereunder the final version of the dissenting
> opinion I would like to file to the report from the Subgroup:
>
>
>
> ==
>
> "This dissenting opinion is based on serious concerns about the
> Sub-Group's treatment of the substantial comments and proposals submitted
> during the public comment period by the Governments of Brazil, Switzerland
> and the United Kingdom (who are all active members of the GAC's Human
> Rights and International Law Working Group).
>
> Their expectation was that a properly balanced result would reflect some
> if not all of the positions and proposals made in their responses. The
> governments are dismayed to note, however, that there are no changes of any
> significance to the draft FoI and Considerations documents that addresses
> any of the substantial issues which they raised.
>
> In particular, the three Governments were in full agreement that the FOI
> text should make stronger reference to the UN Guiding Principles as the
> most relevant voluntary international standard. However, the Subgroup did
> not undertake an inclusive effort to determine if a compromise text could
> be formulated that would accommodate this position of the three
> governments.
>
> Furthermore, the drafting team which was created by the Sub-Group in order
> to develop changes to the draft texts following consideration of the inputs
> received, lacked appropriate stakeholder balance as there was no open
> invitation to participate in the drafting team, which contributed to having
> no Government representation on this team.
>
> This dissenting opinion is supported by Jorge Cancio (Switzerland) and
> Kavouss Arasteh (Iran), members of this Subgroup, and the representatives
> of the Governments of Brazil and UK who are observers on this Subgroup, and
> the representative of the Government of Peru.”
>
> ==
>
>
>
> Thanks for including it in the final report to be transmitted to the CCWG
> Plenary for its consideration.
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Jorge
>
>
>
>
>
> *Von:* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [
> mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] *Im Auftrag von *MSSI
> Secretariat
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 30. August 2017 00:54
> *An:* CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
> *Cc:* ws2-hr at icann.org
> *Betreff:* [CCWG-ACCT] Recordings, DAIRs, Raw Caption Notes for Human
> Rights Subgroup Meeting #32 | 29 August 2017
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
>
>
> You may find the recordings, *D*ecisions, *A*ction *I*tems, *R*equests
> (DAIRs), and raw caption notes for CCWG Accountability WS2 *Human Rights
> Subgroup - Meeting #32  *–  *29 August 2017*  posted at
> https://community.icann.org/x/LwIhB
>
>
>
> The transcript will be posted on when it becomes available (usually in 3
> to 5 business days after the call).
>
>
>
> A copy of the DAIRs and raw caption notes may be found below.
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> *Yvette Guigneaux*
>
> *(MSSI) Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives *
>
> Projects & Operations Assistant.
>
>
>
> *ICANN – Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers*
>
> Email:  yvette.guigneaux at icann.org
>
> Cell:  +1-310-460-8432 <(310)%20460-8432>
>
> Skype:  yvette.guigneaux.icann
>
> www.icann.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Raw Captioning Notes*
>
> *Disclaimer: This rough edit transcript, which may contain missing,
> misspelled or paraphrased words, is only provided for your immediate review
> and is not certified as verbatim and is not to be cited in any way. *
>
> ·         *Word Doc
> <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69272111/Raw%20Transcript_%20Human%20Rights_%20Meeting%2032_%2029AUG17.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1504045965699&api=v2>*
>
> ·         *PDF
> <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69272111/Raw%20Transcript_%20Human%20Rights_%20Meeting%2032_%2029AUG17.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1504045991224&api=v2>*
>
> *Decisions:  *Decision taken to proceed with submitting the revised
> report for CCWG-Plenary’s consideration.
>
> *Action Items:  *NTO to submit the revised report for CCWG-Plenary’s
> consideration.
>
> *Requests:  *Members of the subgroup are seeking clarification on who has
> rights to file a Minority Statement, per the CCWG charter, and what has
> been done in the past:
>
> ·         Has an Observer filed a Minority Statement in CCWG
> Accountability before?
>
> ·         Has anyone who wasn't an official Member  (appointed from an
> SOAC)  filed a Minority Statement in CCWG before?
>
> ·         What the CCWG Charter say about who has rights to file a
> Minority Statement?
>
> *Documents - Revisions to HR Subgroup email to CCWG Plenary
> <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69272111/Revisions%20to%20HR%20Subgroup%20email%20to%20CCWG%20Plenary%5B1%5D.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1504013260000&api=v2>*
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> 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
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20170905/1da6c70e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2503 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20170905/1da6c70e/image004-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6501 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-hr/attachments/20170905/1da6c70e/image003-0001.png>