[CCWG-ACCT] Timeline for HR and Jurisdiction publications

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Seun,

Tks for your immediate reply.

Unfortunately, decision making at the level of governments are very
difficult since many internal7 national entities are involved. HR is a
sensitive, delicate and crucial issue and must be properly treated. Private
sector are more autonomous  .They have more legal and administrative
supports than some other constituencies like GAC/ Governments which are ,at
least equally ,if not more concerned about the Public Policy impact of IT

Regards

Kavouss

2017-01-18 14:45 GMT+01:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:

> Hello Kavouss,
>
> <Filtered lists that I don't have posting rights to>
>
> Note that my comment was not about supporting 19th because that isn't
> feasible if we work with 60days but my support was rather for number of
> days for comment period. Nevertheless more time is definitely better,
> perhaps a balance would be end of March assuming they are going out for PC
> this week.
>
> Overall it all depends on the day the PC is set to go live. I would be
> fine with the PC ending 2weeks (and beyond) after ICANN 58
>
> Regards
> Sent from my LG G4
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>
> On 18 Jan 2017 2:14 p.m., "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Seun,
>> Tks for your comments
>> Pls see below. I am  strongly against the deadline  of 19 March for
>> public comments see below
>> Dear Co-Chair,
>> Thank you very much for your thoughts and vision.
>> However, I am not in favour of closing dates to be 19 March due to the
>> fact that for some SO/AC, physical ( FACE -TO FACE) discussion is
>> considerably contribute to the public comments thus we need to have
>> sufficient time to react. I suggest that the response time to HR be
>> prolonged to end 30 calendre days after the end of ICANN 58. Once again we
>> should not do the thing harshly .Please allow those constituencies like GAC
>> that only in a physical meeting they would be able to have full debate on
>> the matter and then after have sufficient time to respond to the public
>> comment.
>> This is a formal proposal.
>> I request ,at the same time, our dear chair ,Niels to also not to be in
>> hurry and allow us to think, top reflect and to react .
>> Regards
>>
>> 2017-01-18 14:03 GMT+01:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Hello Mathieu,
>>>
>>> I will be fine with a public comment that closes 60 days from
>>> publication for both HR and jurisdiction. That means the date can't be 19th
>>> since the PC has not yet commenced.
>>>
>>> That said, I wrote to Niel on the HR list indicating that it might be
>>> prudent to get answers to the questions put to the Co-Chairs of the CCWG
>>> plenary before putting the FoI to PC. This is because the questions sent in
>>> by Niel has a lot to do with the FoI. I don't think we've gotten a response
>>> to those questions yet?
>>>
>>> If we want to send the document for public comment anyway then it should
>>> clearly state in the preamble whether the points listed in Annex12 were
>>> considered during the development of the FoI.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Sent from my LG G4
>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>>>
>>> On 18 Jan 2017 11:50, "Mathieu Weill" <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Although it is uncertain exactly when the questionnaire for
>>>> Jurisdiction and the public comment for Human Rights will actually be
>>>> published the Co-Chairs would suggest that the closing date for both of
>>>> these be after the Copenhagen meeting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The reasoning behind this is that at best the standard 42 days
>>>> consultation period would end immediately prior to the Copenhagen - this
>>>> would imply chartering organizations and community members would be
>>>> considering this while they are preparing for Copenhagen - which as Cheryl
>>>> Langdon-Orr has pointed out on our last plenary is not an ideal situation.
>>>> Additionally staff would not have enough time to prepare the report on
>>>> these for our consideration in Copenhagen.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Additionally the jurisdiction questionnaire is meant to be considered
>>>> by a wider community and as such it would be good to extend the standard
>>>> period to 60 days to allow everyone ample opportunity to answer the
>>>> questionnaire.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As such we would recommend that the closing period for the Human Rights
>>>> public consultation be Sunday 19 March 23:59 UTC and that the Jurisdiction
>>>> questionnaire request responses within 60 days of the initial publication.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you in advance for your feedbacks on this proposal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Thomas, Leon & Mathieu
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20170118/5ed2d533/attachment.html>