Hi Tijani,
I think that the reference to "consensus recommendation in Work Stream 2" and the reference to the same process as in Work Stream one in the proposed bylaw language does, in fact, mean the approval of chartering organisations.
Furthermore, when we were agreeing on the HR bylaw language, the main idea was that the FOI will follow the same process as WS1, so the initial reference to CO's approval was supposed to serve this purpose. Thus, the new language, in my opinion, is fine, clear and fully in line with the intent of the report
Other than that, +1 to Greg and Niels for all the points.
Best regards
Tatiana
On 02/05/16 10:22, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
Hi Niels,
The last modification of the bylaws proposed by the lawyers didn’t make any reference to the chartering organizations approval while it is clearly mentioned in the CCWG last proposal ratified by the chartering organizations.
Have a nice day
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Tijani BEN JEMAAExecutive DirectorMediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)Phone: +216 98 330 114+216 52 385 114-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Le 2 mai 2016 à 09:11, Niels ten Oever <lists@nielstenoever.net> a écrit :
Dear Tijani and Kavouss,
Could you please indicate where the proposed text is not consistent with
the report? Concrete references would be helpful for me to better
understand your point.
Thanks in advance,
Niels
On 05/02/2016 09:38 AM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
Tijani +1
I fully agree with Tijani
People misuse the opportunity to make modifications that were not agreed
during the lkast 16 months
NO CHANGE NO MODIFICATIONS.
During the WSIS I WILL tell everybody that there is no supervision nor
control on what we have agreed and the people will make whatever change
they wish without the agreements of the others
KAVOUSS
2016-05-02 8:14 GMT+02:00 Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn
<mailto:tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn>>:
Mathieu and all,
The modification proposed doesn’t reflect the CCWG last proposal
approved by the chartering organization. I don’t think we are
allowed to write bylaws that are not the exact interpretation of the
approved document that had the CCWG consensus and the charting
organizations ratification.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Tijani BEN JEMAA*
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)
Phone: +216 98 330 114
+216 52 385 114
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Le 2 mai 2016 à 04:23, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com
<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> a écrit :
Mathieu,
Tks
Pls NOTE MY SERIOUS OBJECTIONS to:
1.NOT MENTIONING REFERNCE TO THE APPROVAL OF CHARTERING
ORGANIZATIONBS in HR
2. GIVE GIVE A BLANKET AGREEMENT TO THE DOCUMENTS WHICH YET TO BE
DRAFTED.
3. Making so many changes to the Third proposals . We must avoid
having a new proposal
Kavouss
2016-05-01 22:42 GMT+02:00 Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr
<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>>:
Dear colleagues,
Please find below for your consideration some suggestions from
our lawyers for clarification of the bylaw language regarding
the Human rights FoI. This follows our request during the
previous call.
Best,
Mathieu Weill
---------------
Depuis mon mobile, désolé pour le style
Début du message transféré :
*Expéditeur:* "Gregory, Holly" <holly.gregory@sidley.com
<mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com>>
*Date:* 1 mai 2016 19:10:53 UTC+2
*Destinataire:* "'Mathieu Weill'" <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr
<mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>>, "'Thomas Rickert'"
<thomas@rickert.net <mailto:thomas@rickert.net>>, León Felipe
Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx
<mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>>, "bylaws-coord@icann.org
<mailto:bylaws-coord@icann.org>" <bylaws-coord@icann.org
<mailto:bylaws-coord@icann.org>>
*Cc:* ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org
<mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>>, "Rosemary E. Fei"
<rfei@adlercolvin.com <mailto:rfei@adlercolvin.com>>,
"ICANN@adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN@adlercolvin.com>"
<ICANN@adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN@adlercolvin.com>>,
Sidley ICANN CCWG <sidleyicannccwg@sidley.com
<mailto:sidleyicannccwg@sidley.com>>,
"Samantha.Eisner@icann.org
<mailto:Samantha.Eisner@icann.org>"
<Samantha.Eisner@icann.org <mailto:Samantha.Eisner@icann.org>>
*Objet:* *Human Rights Transition Provision: Bylaws Section
27.3(a)*
Dear Co-Chairs and Bylaws Coordinating Group:
On the CCWG call last week, there was a discussion of the
Bylaws language regarding the transition provision on Human
Rights*//*[27.3(a)] and it was suggested that the language be
clarified to ensure that the same approval process used for
Work Stream 1 would apply. We propose the following
clarifying edits. We suggest that you share this with the
CCWG and if there is agreement, the following proposed edit
should be included in the CCWG’s public comment:____
Redline:____
*Section 27.3. HUMAN RIGHTS____*
__ __
(a) The Core Value set forth in Section 1.2(b)(viii) shall
have no force or effect unless and until a framework of
interpretation for human rights (“*FOI-HR*”) is approved by
(i) approved for submission to the Board by the
CCWG-Accountability as a consensus recommendation in Work
Stream 2, and (ii) approved by each of the
CCWG-Accountability’s chartering organizations and (iii) the
Board, (in each thecase of the Board, using the same process
and criteria used by the Boardto consider the as for Work
Stream 1 Recommendations).____
__ __
(b) No person or entity shall be entitled to invoke the
reconsideration process provided in Section 4.2, or the
independent review process provided in Section 4.3, based
solely on the inclusion of the Core Value set forth in
Section 1.2(b)(viii) (i) until after the FOI-HR contemplated
by Section 27.3(a) is in place or (ii) for actions of ICANN
or the Board that occurred prior to the____
effectiveness of the FOI-HR.____
Clean:____
*Section 27.3. HUMAN RIGHTS____*
__ __
(a) The Core Value set forth in Section 1.2(b)(viii) shall
have no force or effect unless and until a framework of
interpretation for human rights (“*FOI-HR*”) is (i) approved
for submission to the Board by the CCWG-Accountability as a
consensus recommendation in Work Stream 2 and (ii) approved
by the Board, in each case, using the same process and
criteria as for Work Stream 1 Recommendations.____
__ __
(b) No person or entity shall be entitled to invoke the
reconsideration process provided in Section 4.2, or the
independent review process provided in Section 4.3, based
solely on the inclusion of the Core Value set forth in
Section 1.2(b)(viii) (i) until after the FOI-HR contemplated
by Section 27.3(a) is in place or (ii) for actions of ICANN
or the Board that occurred prior to the____
effectiveness of the FOI-HR.____
Kind regards, ____
__ __
Holly and Rosemary____
__ __
__ __
*HOLLY* *J. GREGORY*
Partner and Co-Chair
Corporate Governance & Executive Compensation Practice Group____
*Sidley Austin LLP*
787 Seventh Avenue
New York, NY 10019
+1 212 839 5853
holly.gregory@sidley.com <mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com>
www.sidley.com <http://www.sidley.com/>____
http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png
<http://www.sidley.com/> *SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP*____
__ __
****************************************************************************************************
This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information
that is privileged or confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the
e-mail and any attachments and notify us
immediately.
****************************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community