[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on Recommendation 6 - Human Rights

Nigel Roberts nigel at channelisles.net
Thu Feb 4 12:03:31 UTC 2016


Trust me, that is exactly what it it says.  It says, "ICANN will respect 
the law, but will do no more".

Under the proposed wording, it is perfectly legal for ICANN to adopting 
binding policies that require property rights to override free 
expression rights in every case. There is no applicable law that 
requires otherwise.

I can see where the discontinuity is here.  You are conflating the 
requirement to follow domestic law, with a committment to respect human 
rights. You are just afraid that someone will one day ask ICANN to 
honour such a committment, and you want to be able to fall back on 
"well, we only follow California law".

The law against murder is not a law requiring ICANN to respect the right 
to life. The law against murder is a State respecting the right to life, 
not ICANN. The same for any other laws that apply to ICANN.

It's entirely otiose to say "ICANN will follow the law". That's inherent 
in ICANN's incorporation and structure.

In the UK there is a fairly detailed legal provision that sets out out 
human rights obligations work (the Human Rights Act 1998 which I studied 
in detail in law school).

Yet even there it is clear from the statute that human rights 
obligations does not apply to private companies unless they adopt them 

The wording chosen, on a strict construction, EXCLUDES all human rights 
obligations -- it does not adopt any at all.

If you don't believe me, let's ask Mrs Clooney for her opinion.

On 04/02/16 09:02, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
> Hello Nigel,
>>>    and clearly says "human rights are NOT part of our core values".
> I don't think that is quite right.
> Applicable law actually covers some human rights (e.g. slavery, torture)   - it just may not cover all the human rights that you would like to be considered by ICANN.
> There are some human rights that clearly don't apply to ICANN - ie we don't have arrest powers so arbitrary arrest clearly doesn't apply, nor do we charge people with penal offences, or confer nationality on people.
> It is determining the relevant human rights that should apply to ICANN  beyond the basic set that is in applicable law that is the subject for work stream 2.
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list