[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2 - 27-28 September Plenary Agenda and Materials - 1 of 2 - FoI text proposal to bridge divergences

Thu Sep 28 17:58:12 UTC 2017

+1 ..avri doria's 's comment.
And I also have to note Mathew's view.
rd

On Sep 28, 2017 11:28 AM, "avri doria" <avri at apc.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I do not see the problem with including a statement such as this.
>
> Perhaps I would indicate that it was a not for profit business instead
> of a business and would insert an "as appropriate" after "as a useful
> guide".
>
> But I think mentioning this among the international instruments is a
> good idea.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 28-Sep-17 08:21, Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> >
> >
> > Further to my Email below, I would like to share with you the
> > following proposal that would constitute in my view an acceptable
> > outcome of the public consultation on the Framework of Interpretation,
> > and build on the wording proposals made by Switzerland in its public
> > comment input (see attached) and the exchanges had thereafter in the
> > Subgroup.
> >
> >
> >
> > Specifically, I would like to propose that the following paragraph on
> > page 6 (under “internationally recognized human rights”) be reworded
> > as follows (changes in red):
> >
> >
> >
> > “/By committing to one or more of these international instruments,
> > nation states are expected to embed human rights in their national
> > legislation*. */
> >
> > */The UN Guiding Principles on Businesses and Human Rights are
> > relevant for business organizations. Insofar ICANN the Organization is
> > concerned, it should consider, as a business, the UN Guiding
> > Principles on Businesses and Human Rights as a useful guide when
> > applying the Human Rights Core Value./**“*
> >
> >
> >
> > The UN Guiding Principles on Businesses and Human Rights (UNGP) are
> > the universally accepted voluntary standard for business
> > organizations. Therefore, we feel that it should be mentioned under
> > the instruments regarding “internationally recognized human rights”.
> > In order to avoid any extension of the UNGP to the non-business
> > elements of ICANN (SO/ACs) there is specific mention that the UNGP
> > would be relevant only for ICANN the Organization. In addition, the
> > mention is constrained to having to “consider” the UNGP “as a useful
> > guide” – which, in our view, eliminates any perceived danger of
> > creating any obligation whatsoever through this mention.
> >
> >
> >
> > I hope that this compromise proposal may be positively considered by
> > all of you. Please note that it is made only by me with the aim of
> > arriving at a common ground and that it has not been possible to
> > coordinate due to time constraints with the other participants joining
> > the dissent.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> >
> >
> > Jorge
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *Von:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> > [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *Im Auftrag
> > von *Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch
> > *Gesendet:* Montag, 25. September 2017 15:34
> > *An:* turcotte.bernard at gmail.com; accountability-cross-
> community at icann.org
> > *Betreff:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2 - 27-28 September
> > Plenary Agenda and Materials - 1 of 2
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> >
> >
> > Regarding *agenda point 8* and specifically the *dissenting opinion*
> > attached to the Report from the Subgroup dealing with the Framework of
> > Interpretation (FOI) of the Human Rights Core Value (see p. 2 of the
> > attached document), which I have filed together with a number of
> > colleagues, I would like to share some thoughts and a suggested path
> > forward with the CCWG Plenary before the calls scheduled to discuss this.
> >
> >
> >
> > The main point of the dissent is, in my view, that we feel that the
> > public comment period showed the existence of two schools of thought:
> > some that favored maintaining the text sent to public comment “as is”
> > (ALAC to a certain extent, and a number of different GNSO
> > constituencies) and those (UK, BRZ, and CH) proposing some steps
> > forward, especially in the recognition of the UN Guiding Principles
> > (Ruggie Principles).
> >
> >
> >
> > However, again in our view, the discussions in the Subgroup did not
> > yield a properly balanced result, which would have reflected at least
> > some if not all of the positions and proposals made by the named
> > Governments. This relates in particular, _that the FOI text should
> > make stronger reference to the UN Guiding Principles as the most
> > relevant voluntary international standard_. In our view, the Subgroup
> > did not undertake an inclusive enough effort to determine if a
> > compromise text could be formulated that would accommodate this
> > position of the three governments.
> >
> >
> >
> > Therefore, I would like to _suggest that the CCWG Plenary could decide
> > that some additional efforts to reaching a broader consensus on this
> > important issue should be made_ – a broader consensus that could be
> > more inclusive of all views expressed during the public comment period.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hence, I would _suggest that the CCWG decides that the Report together
> > with the dissent are sent back to the Subgroup with the request that a
> > broader consensus solution is quickly sought within the coming e.g. 2
> > weeks after the Plenary call_.
> >
> >
> >
> > I hope this way to proceed may seem reasonable to you and obtain your
> > support during the abovementioned call. I would be happy to answer any
> > questions you may have and look forward to your feedback.
> >
> >
> >
> > For my part I’ll try hard to attend the Wednesday call, but I’m
> > (physically) attending at the same time /the UN CSTD Working Group on
> > Enhanced Cooperation/. Hence, I would be very thankful if this issue
> > could be discussed on the Thursday call instead if possible.
> >
> >
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> >
> >
> > Jorge
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *Von:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> > <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
> > [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *Im Auftrag
> > von *Bernard Turcotte
> > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 21. September 2017 18:05
> > *An:* Accountability Cross Community
> > <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> > <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> > *Betreff:* [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2 - 27-28 September
> > Plenary Agenda and Materials - 1 of 2
> >
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> >
> >
> > Please fins below and attached the agenda for the 27-28 September
> plenary.
> >
> >
> >
> > As noted in an earlier email the Co-Chairs do not believe the plenary
> > can get through all of these materials in a single two hour session
> > and that it is imperative we do so this week given the timing
> > constraints we are working under. As such an additional 2 hour plenary
> > session has been added 28 September 1900 UTC (the original plenary
> > meeting scheduled for 27 September 1300 UTC still stands).
> >
> >
> >
> > Also please note that given the large volume of documents we will be
> > including these in two separate emails to avoid size limit issues for
> > participants.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or
> > problems with the documents.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bernard Turcotte
> >
> > ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
> >
> >
> >
> > *Agenda for the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 Plenary of 27 and 28 September*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > 1.     Introduction, update to SOIs, reminder on standards of behavior
> >
> > 2.     Review of Agenda
> >
> > 3.     Administration
> >
> > 3.1.Review timeline.
> >
> > 3.2.Reminder of 27 October face to face in Abu Dhabi.
> >
> > 3.3.Reminder of High Interest sessions in Abu Dhabi
> >
> > 4.     Legal Committee Update
> >
> > 4.1.         Question sent to ICANN Legal on Ombudsman recommendation
> > 8 regarding the independence of the proposed Ombuds Advisory Panel
> > (questions sent directly to ICANN legal on approval of Co-chairs).
> >
> > 4.2.Transparency – at the 13 September meeting of the sub-group
> > updated language for recommendations 2, 15 and 16 were considered.
> > ICANN Legal advised that they would consider these and provide written
> > feedback to the sub-group.
> >
> > 5.     Point on Quorum (held over from last plenary)
> >
> > 6.     Second Reading of the draft recommendations of the Diversity
> > sub-group.
> >
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity-DrafRecommendations-20170927
> >         (attached - same document as distributed to the 30 August
> plenary)
> >
> > 7.     First reading of the final recommendations of the SOAC
> > Accountability sub-group.
> >
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-FinalReport-20170927 (attached)
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-FinalReport-RedLine-20170927
> >         (attached)
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-AnalysisandResponsetoPublicCom
> ments-20170927
> >         (attached)
> >
> > 8.     First reading of the final recommendations of the Human Rights
> > sub-group.
> >
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-HumanRight-FinalReportWithAdditions-
> 20170927
> >         (attached)
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-HumanRights-PublicConsultation-May2017-
> Responses
> >         (attached)
> >
> > 9.     First reading of the draft recommendation of the Ombuds
> > sub-group (please note that the final report of the external review is
> > provided as a separate file due to size issues)
> >
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-DrafRecommendations-20170927
> >         (attached in second email)
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-ExternalReview-Final (attached
> >         in second email)
> >
> > 10.First reading of the draft recommendation of the Staff
> > Accountability sub-group.
> >
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-StaffAcct-DraftReport-20170927V1.6
> >         (attached in second email)
> >       o CCWG-Accountability-StaffAcct-DraftReport-
> TrnasmissionLetter-20170927
> >         (attached in second email)
> >
> > 11.AOB
> >
> > 12.Next Plenaries
> >
> > 12.1.               Thursday 28 September 19:00UTC
> >
> > 12.2.               Wednesday 4 October 0500 UTC (optional but please
> > schedule)
> >
> > 12.3.               Wednesday 11 October 1300 UTC (optional but please
> > schedule)
> >
> > 12.4.               Wednesday 18 October 1900UTC
> >
> > 13.Adjournment
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20170928/bb2be799/attachment-0001.html>