[Ws2-jurisdiction] SGT Jurisdiction. Final Report. Statement from Brazil.

[Greg Shatan]

Benedicto,

Sorry, I didn't see your request before I sent off the draft, so i was
unable to consider it.  Please feel free to send it directly to the Plenary.

Best regards,

Greg

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Benedicto Fonseca Filho <
benedicto.fonseca at itamaraty.gov.br> wrote:

> Dear Greg,
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Could you please make sure the message below appears in the e-mail you
> will send to the CCWG plenary with the report?
>
>
>
> "Brazil expresses its opposition to the "Final Report" on Jurisdiction
> that is being submitted to the CCWG plenary.
>
>
>
> The report does not address the concerns Brazil and others repeatedly
> raised during the work of the subgroup, nor does it duly take into account
> the contributions Brazil and others timely submitted on jurisdictional
> issues that motivated the launching of Work Stream 2.
>
>
>
> Furthermore, the report falls short of the objectives envisaged for Work
> Stream 2 – in particular the need to ensure that ICANN is accountable
> towards all stakeholders –, by not tackling the issue of ICANN's subjection
> to US jurisdiction, as well as leaving untouched the unsatisfactory
> situation where US authorities (tribunals, enforcement agencies, regulatory
> bodies, etc.) can possibly interfere with the activities ICANN performs in
> the global public interest.
>
>
>
> As we have stated from day one of Work Stream 1 back in 2014, Brazil
> cannot accept this state of affairs – where Governments are not placed on
> an equal footing vis-à-vis the country of incorporation as regards their
> ability to participate in ICANN's management of Internet global resources
> –, which is not in line with the rules and principles embodied in the Tunis
> Agenda for the Information Society nor with the fundamental tenets of the
> multi-stakeholder approach, which we uphold and support.
>
>
>
> In this respect, Brazil recalls that its non-opposition to the conclusion
> and outcome of Work Stream 1 was made in good faith based on the
> understanding that a satisfactory settlement of the jurisdictional issues,
> as identified during the transition process, would be addressed in a
> satisfactory manner. We are saddened to notice that the report does not
> live up to that expectation.
>
>
>
> Finally, Brazil objects to the portrayal of the report as a consensus
> document, which we understand is due to an incorrect consensus-level
> designation made by the Chair, as well as the fact that many views and
> contributions made during the process – including in some cases our own -
> were systematically disregarded or ignored, with no effort being made in
> order to build consensus and bridge differences with respect to these views
> and contributions.
>
>
>
> Brazil will submit within the agreed deadline a document to be attached to
> report with the points we consider should have been included therein."
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Benedicto
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *De:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@
> icann.org] em nome de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc at gmail.com]
> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 11 de outubro de 2017 15:42
> *Para:* ws2-jurisdiction
> *Cc:* acct-staff at icann.org
> *Assunto:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] Documents for Review and Approval in
> Today's Meeting
>
> All,
>
> I attach the current drafts of the Draft Report (including the OFAC
> Recommendations) and the Choice of Law and Venue Recommendation, as Word
> and PDF documents.  The current drafts are also available as Google Docs.
> In order to keep the drafts synchronized, I have changed the sharing status
> of the Draft Report to "view only" and copied the Choice of Law and Venue
> draft into a new Google Doc, with view only status.  Links are below:
>
> Draft Report:   *MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website
> at "docs.google.com". Do not trust this website:* *MailScanner has
> detected definite fraud in the website at "docs.google.com". Do not trust
> this website:* https://docs.google.com/document/d/
> 135c03wFSIlz1Lqdv6Tte8sw7tMinsQEgy0CoNtRXT4Y/edit?usp=sharing
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/135c03wFSIlz1Lqdv6Tte8sw7tMinsQEgy0CoNtRXT4Y/edit?usp=sharing>
>
> Choice of Law and Venue:
>  *MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at
> "docs.google.com". Do not trust this website:* *MailScanner has detected
> definite fraud in the website at "docs.google.com". Do not trust this
> website:* https://docs.google.com/document/d/
> 1Z7A233KiPQV2ijVgWzxWOv3eePTy9rSPIMFxbiZ86lo/edit?usp=sharing
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z7A233KiPQV2ijVgWzxWOv3eePTy9rSPIMFxbiZ86lo/edit?usp=sharing>
>
> There is only one suggested change to look at at in the Draft Report.
>
> There are a number of suggested changes in the Choice of Law and Venue
> Recommendation.  Unless the Subgroup decides otherwise, these changes will
> be made final after the meeting.  (Note that other text is still open for
> suggested changes even if not marked in the document, but these changes
> will need to be finalized on the call.
>
> There are also a number of "Comments" in the documents.  These are left in
> so you can see them, but they will be taken out when the document is
> finalized for submission to the Plenary.  (Note: It's easier to see the
> comments on the PDF but some are truncated.  In the Word doc, you'll need
> to click on each one to expand it.  It's easiest to see them all in the
> Google Doc.)
>
> *THESE DOCUMENTS MUST BE SENT TO THE PLENARY BY 23:59 UTC TODAY IN ORDER
> TO BE PART OF THE CCWG REPORT.*
>
> I look forward to our upcoming call.
>
> Greg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20171011/2cffc5a6/attachment.html>