[CCWG-ACCT] Two items on draft bylaws

[Niels ten Oever]

Dear David,

We agreed on a interpretation of this in the explanatory text, so I
would disagree with changing the interpretation and implementation of
that now.

Best,

Niels

On 04/07/2016 11:07 PM, McAuley, David wrote:
> And second, about human rights, specificallyan implication in Article
> 27.3.(c) that HR claims might be a proper subject for RR or IRP after
> the FOI is developed.
> 
>  
> 
> This implication is not in the Annex 06 bylaw text (paragraph 23),
> although it appears in explanatory text (paragraph 19). But both bylaw
> text and explanatory text say that acceptance of the FOI will depend on
> the same processes followed in WS1, and bylaw text makes clear that the
> FOI has to be approved by the Board after it follows the same process
> and criteria it used in WS1.
> 
>  
> 
> In my opinion it is a mistake to insert this implication in “real”
> bylaws as the issue is important as well as complex and the WS2 FOI
> group should have a chance to debate the merits.
> 
>  
> 

-- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9