[council] [Ext] Re: For your review - updated PDP Templates to facilitate consideration of impact on HR
Stephanie E Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Tue Jun 6 22:20:02 UTC 2023
I really support Anne's request for more time. This is an important
issue, given the fundamental tension between free expression interests
of the parties. HR impact assessments are a work in progress still, and
are only as strong as the information (facts) and risk imaginations
brought to them. Not sure that the FOI is going to assist in that
process, so need to go study them both....and we are packing and dealing
with umpteen pre-meetings this week. Please, more time.
Stephanie PErrin
On 2023-06-06 10:58 a.m., Anne ICANN via council wrote:
> Thanks Thomas. I think you are saying the ByLaws always govern and
> that the FOI is a community consensus interpretation of the ByLaws
> provision re the Human Rights Core Value. Is that correct?
>
> I will give an example as to the reason I believe it's important to
> clarify the significance of the Human Rights Framework of
> Interpretation to the HR Impact Analysis:
>
> Council will soon debate the best tool for addressing the Closed
> Generics policy issue. Regardless of the tool that is chosen, it
> appears that Human Rights in relation to freedom of expression will be
> asserted by both those who advocate for unrestricted Closed Generics
> and those who advocate that no Closed Generics be permitted. The
> highly anticipated Facilitated Dialog work on a proposed framework for
> Closed Generics will presumably be subject to a Human Rights Impact
> Analysis. All indications based on comments in Council meetings are
> that Applicants for Closed Generics will assert that the GAC Advice
> abridges Applicant freedom of expression. End User advocates will
> assert that restricting registrations in generic TLDs to a closed set
> of registrants abridges end user freedom of expression.
>
> Having participated on the Sub Team for Human Rights in Workstream 2,
> I can safely say that the balance to be struck here is exactly what
> the Human Rights Framework of Interpretation was meant to address.
> Accordingly, I think it would be unwise to finalize the templates for
> the Impact Analysis without acknowledging directly the fact that the
> HR Framework of Interpretation governs interpretation of the Human
> Rights Core Value in the policy process, including the process of HR
> Impact Analysis. I do agree with you that the ByLaws always govern
> but the FOI itself is not a ByLaw. It is a guide that is supposed to
> help establish principles for applying the ByLaw in the policymaking
> context.
>
> I would appreciate getting an extension beyond the June 7 deadline
> specified by Marika so that this important subject of the templates
> could be discussed in light of the upcoming work on Closed Generics.
> (I know Marika will say we can approve the templates and address that
> issue later with respect to that policy work but I think it's
> important for Council to address this at the template stage.)
>
> Thank you,
> Anne
> Anne Aikman-Scalese
> GNSO Councilor
> NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024
> anneicanngnso at gmail.com
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 12:26 PM Thomas Rickert | rickert.law
> <thomas at rickert.law> wrote:
>
> Hi Anne, all,
>
> sorry for chiming in late.
>
> To be honest, I do not recall how the framework was intended to be
> used. I will offer my take on this, though, based on the
> documentation.
>
> The FOI is a framework of interpretation for ICANN’s human rights
> bylaw. When ICANN produces documents, we do not always refer to
> the bylaws to state that documents or policies must be compliant
> with ICANN’s bylaws. It is taken for granted.
>
> Shouldn’t the same be true for the FOI so that that document is
> always relevant as it is to be read in conjunction with the bylaws?
>
> In practical terms, I think that we do not need to explicitly
> reference the FOI, whether it is a report or something else.
>
> On the contrary, would we not create precedent by referencing it
> suggesting that when it is not applicable when not explicitly
> referenced?
>
> Best,
>
> Thomas
>
> *Von: *council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> im Auftrag von
> Anne ICANN via council <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Antworten an: *Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso at gmail.com>
> *Datum: *Dienstag, 16. Mai 2023 um 16:50
> *An: *Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> *Cc: *"council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Betreff: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: For your review - updated PDP
> Templates to facilitate consideration of impact on HR
>
> Thanks Marika. Not sure how the wiki page language was developed
> or why the FOI is referred to there as a "report". I do know that
> the ByLaws change was not effective until the Framework of
> Interpretation was formally adopted and so we labored long to
> reach agreement on the language of the FOI. Thomas Rickert may be
> in the best position to provide further comment on the history of
> this Workstream 2 work and the role of the FOI in assessing HR impact.
>
> Anne Aikman-Scalese
>
> GNSO Councilor
>
> NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024
>
> anneicanngnso at gmail.com
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 7:45 AM Marika Konings
> <marika.konings at icann.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Anne, this is actually how it is referred to on the
> wiki page: “The ‘FOI’ is a brief report that offers consensus
> interpretation of bylaw language pertaining to human rights.
> This report was developed by a subcommittee within the
> CCWG-WS2”. It is definitely an important document in the
> context of the ICANN HR Bylaws, but not specific to assessing
> the impact of policy recommendations on HR as far as I
> understand which is what the additional language in the
> templates is focused on per the CCOICI recommendation.
>
> Maybe others can weigh in on whether it is viewed as essential
> that a reference to the framework is included in the templates
> themselves or whether it is sufficient that it is included
> together with other relevant materials that are intended to
> assist community and staff?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> *From: *Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 16:07
> *To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> *Cc: *"council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Ext] Re: [council] For your review - updated
> PDP Templates to facilitate consideration of impact on HR
>
> Thanks Marika. Certainly all the materials are relevant but I
> don't believe the Framework of Interpretation is a "report".
> Having working on that Workstream 2 team, I am aware that the
> ByLaws change was specifically designed to only take effect
> after the HR Framework of Interpretation was adopted. Thus,
> the Framework of Interpretation is quite important and is not
> just a "report."
>
> Given that the Framework was designed to effect
> implementation, it should be referred to specifically in the
> documents.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Anne
>
> Anne Aikman-Scalese
>
> GNSO Councilor
>
> NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024
>
> anneicanngnso at gmail.com
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 5:56 AM Marika Konings
> <marika.konings at icann.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Anne. Our understanding is that the Framework of
> Interpretation is a report that offers consensus
> interpretation of the ICANN Bylaw language pertaining to
> human rights, it is not a tool that has been designed to
> facilitate assessing the potential impact of policy
> recommendations on human rights. The dedicated wiki page
> contains additional documents and information that may
> provide further guidance hence why we thought it would be
> a better approach to refer those interested to learn more
> there so that they have the range of documents and tools
> available to assist in this process.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> *From: *Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 16 May 2023 at 14:46
> *To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> *Cc: *"council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Ext] Re: [council] For your review -
> updated PDP Templates to facilitate consideration of
> impact on HR
>
> Thanks Marika. Sometimes these links pepper the WG with
> too many different background documents. Here the HR-FOI
> is most relevant to the scope of the assessment of the
> impact so I still believe it's a good idea to include a
> reference to that in the text. If you think including the
> link makes it too long, then I would just add "... in
> accordance with the ICANN Human Rights Framework of
> Interpretation."
>
> This language would make the scope of the work much more
> readily understandable. I hope this request is not too
> burdensome.
>
> Thank you!
>
> Anne
>
> Anne Aikman-Scalese
>
> GNSO Councilor
>
> NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024
>
> anneicanngnso at gmail.com
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 2:31 AM Marika Konings
> <marika.konings at icann.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Anne – thanks for your suggestion. Please note that
> the Framework of Interpretation, as well as other
> documents that may aid community and staff, can be
> found on the wiki page that is already referenced in
> the request for an Issue Report Template as well as
> Preliminary Issue Report template (see
> https://community.icann.org/x/RAPCCw). We’ll make sure
> to include the same link in the Charter Template and
> the Initial Report template.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> *From: *Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Monday, 15 May 2023 at 19:17
> *To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> *Cc: *"council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] For your review -
> updated PDP Templates to facilitate consideration of
> impact on HR
>
> Thanks Marika and many thanks to Ephraim! These forms
> look good. My only comment is that in each section in
> each of the forms asking whether there will be an
> impact on Human Rights, there should be a link
> inserted to the Framework of Interpretation for Human
> Rights(HR-FOI) that was adopted by the Board. The
> Framework should be very helpful in the preparation of
> the Issue Report and also to the WG as it conducts the
> HR impact analysis on a recommendation by
> recommendation basis as specified in the Charter
> template. (I understand that each Recommendation of
> the WG must be accompanied by an HR impact analysis.
> If that is not the case, please advise by reply all.)
>
> The link to the FOI is here:
>
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-annex-3-hr-foi-final-recs-27mar18-en.pdf
>
> So, for example, in the Working Group Charter
> template, we should insert the language shown below in
> blue:
>
> Thank you!
>
> Anne
>
> Impact on Human Rights
> The WG is expected to consider the potential impact of
> any recommendations on human rights as set forth in
> the ICANN Human Rights Framework of Interpretation
> (HR-FOI) linked here:
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ccwg-acct-ws2-annex-3-hr-foi-final-recs-27mar18-en.pdf.
> Based
>
> on the information included in the request for an
> Issue Report and the Issue Report, the WG is
> expected to further consider whether there is a likely
> human rights impact, and if so, who are the
> groups expected to be impacted and the expected
> severity of the impact (high / medium / low). If an
> impact is anticipated, the WG is expected to address
> the following questions: 1) is the proposed action
> necessary to achieve the desired outcome, 2) is the
> proposed action proportionate, 3) is the proposed
>
> action legitimate.
>
>
> Anne Aikman-Scalese
>
> GNSO Councilor
>
> NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024
>
> anneicanngnso at gmail.com
>
> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 9:18 AM Marika Konings via
> council <council at gnso.icann.org> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Following the Council’s adoption of the CCOICI’s
> WS2 Recommendations Report, the staff support team
> has worked on:
>
> /“In relation to 3 (Framework of Interpretation
> for Human Rights), the GNSO Council directs GNSO
> Staff Support to work on a proposed implementation
> of the recommendations, consulting relevant
> community experts as needed. This proposed
> implementation is to be reviewed and approved by
> the GNSO Council before implementation”;/
>
> As a result, you will find attached updated
> versions of:
>
> * The request for an Issue Report template;
> * The Preliminary Issue Report template
> (proposed updates on page 6-7);
> * The PDP WG Charter Template (proposed updates
> on page 2-3), and;
> * The PDP WG Initial Report template (proposed
> updates on page 7).
>
> Each of these documents have been updated with a
> set of check-list questions that, as recommended
> by the CCOIC would provide a lightweight mechanism
> to assess whether an impact to human rights is
> likely or expected as a result of the
> consideration of a specific topic and/or the
> related recommendations. Flagging potential impact
> on human rights at an early stage in the process
> will assist in focusing attention on this topic
> throughout the deliberations as well as allowing
> for a more detailed human rights impact
> assessment, if an impact is expected or established.
>
> As you may note, a link is provided to a resource
> page that is managed by ICANN org where additional
> materials are available that may aid both staff as
> well as community in its consideration of the
> potential impact on human rights (see
> https://community.icann.org/x/RAPCCw). As further
> materials are developed, for example, work is
> underway on an ICANN Learn training on inclusion
> which is expected to present examples of protected
> groups, these will get added.
>
> It is also important to keep in mind that these
> documents are templates – it does not prevent
> further elaboration and/or guidance if deemed
> necessary either by Council or community working
> groups.
>
> A special thanks to Ephraim Percy Kenyanito for
> the original input he provided to the CCOICI as
> well as his review of and feedback on these
> templates.
>
> Please provide any comments or suggestions you may
> have *_by 7 June at the latest_*. If additional
> time is needed, please do not hesitate to let us
> know as well.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ariel, Julie and Marika
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to
> the processing of your personal data for purposes
> of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy
> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the
> website Terms of Service
> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit
> the Mailman link above to change your membership
> status or configuration, including unsubscribing,
> setting digest-style delivery or disabling
> delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20230606/5f49c3ac/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the council
mailing list