Imposing /any/ requirements on the policies on ccTLDs is outside of ICANN scope (unless you can show me authority otherwise).
So this is actually a non-question and a straw-man argument.

But I would say that in carrying out the IANA contract ICANN should, indeed MUST, conduct itself to the highest standards of international norms.

Fair hearing. Right to free expression. Right to property.
All controversial things like that.

You'd disagree?



On 30/07/15 11:34, Jordan Carter wrote:

Should ICANN impose global human rights norms on the policies of ccTLDs,
in your view?

Jordan

On 30 July 2015 at 22:29, Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net

<mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:

    With respect to Avri, whose position I very much apprecite on these
    matter I certainly would object to that formulation mostloudly since
    it appears extremely well drafted with the design of excluding all
    the other fundamental rights.

    I'm not even going to make a list of what they are (you can look at
    hte Europan Union Charter at
    http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/charter/index_en.htm)

    But fair hearing and a right to private life are right in the middle
    of ICANN's work.

    What is absolutely unacceptable is anything weaker than.

    "Within its mission and in its operations, ICANN will be committed
    to respect, and ensure the respect of, fundamental human rights".




    On 30/07/15 09:16, Drazek, Keith wrote:

        Hi Avri,

        In order to tie your suggestion directly to the language in
        Secretary Strickling's April 2014 written congressional
        testimony (included in a prior email) and to reduce concerns
        about scope creep, would language along these lines be
        acceptable to you?

            "Within its mission and in its operations, ICANN will be
            committed to respect the fundamental human rights of the
            exercise of free expression and the free flow of information."


        Speaking personally, I could probably support this formulation.
        To be clear, I have not discussed this with the RySG, but it's
        consistent with the requirements outlined by NTIA so I think
        it's certainly worth considering.

        I'm not advocating including this in the Bylaws, but I'm not
        objecting to it either. However, if we don't reach consensus for
        adding to the Bylaws, I definitely think this is worth further
        consideration in WS2 and would support an explicit reference
        using this or similar language and timetable for doing so.

        Regards,
        Keith

            On Jul 30, 2015, at 8:11 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org

            <mailto:avri@acm.org>> wrote:

            Within its mission, ICANN will be committed to respect
            fundamental
                human rights in its operationsespecially with regard to
            the exercise
                of free expression or the free flow of information.

        _______________________________________________
        Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
        Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
        <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
        https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

    _______________________________________________
    Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
    Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
    https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community




--
Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
*InternetNZ*

+64-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
Email: jordan@internetnz.net.nz <mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>
Skype: jordancarter

/A better world through a better Internet /