Niels and Tatiana, I agreed with your complaint against the bylaws text proposed the first time because it didn’t reflect exactly the spirit of the CCWG final proposal ratified by the Chartering organizations. The correction made does not reflect the CCWG final proposal either. You said it is implicit; why we do not explicit it for clarity? Also this proposed bylaws text says " ...in each case, using the same process and criteria as for Work Stream 1 Recommendations ». Those cases are: approved for submission to the Board by the CCWG-Accountability as a consensus recommendation in Work Stream 2 approved by the Board So for the approval by the CCWG and the approval by the board, the same process and criteria as for WS 1 recommendations will be used. You see that this process and those criteria will be used for the approval of CCWG and the Board. How this would imply the ratification of the Chartering organization? I understand that the first proposal made the approval of all the chartering organizations necessary, The modification should keep the reference to the ratification of the chartering organizations and add "as defined in the CCWG charter". ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 09:49, Dr. Tatiana Tropina <t.tropina@mpicc.de> a écrit :
This is fine and a good argument, but I guess the problem is that the draft bylaw on human rights was not word by word with the text of the bylaw introduced in the proposal on the first place. This is why we asked for a clarification. Best regards Tanya
On 02/05/16 10:46, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
Dear All, The drafted bylaws MUST be consistent word by word to the text of the Supplemental CCWG Proposal .Example text on Human Rights Regards Kavouss
2016-05-02 10:11 GMT+02:00 Niels ten Oever <lists@nielstenoever.net <mailto:lists@nielstenoever.net>>: 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 < <mailto:tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn>tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn <mailto:tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> <mailto: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 < <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> <mailto: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 < <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> <mailto: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> <mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com <mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com>>> *Date:* 1 mai 2016 19:10:53 UTC+2 *Destinataire:* "'Mathieu Weill'" < <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>>>, "'Thomas Rickert'" <thomas@rickert.net <mailto:thomas@rickert.net> <mailto:thomas@rickert.net <mailto:thomas@rickert.net>>>, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía < <mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>leonfelipe@sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> <mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>>>, "bylaws-coord@icann.org <mailto:bylaws-coord@icann.org> <mailto:bylaws-coord@icann.org <mailto:bylaws-coord@icann.org>>" <bylaws-coord@icann.org <mailto:bylaws-coord@icann.org> <mailto:bylaws-coord@icann.org <mailto:bylaws-coord@icann.org>>> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff < <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>>>, "Rosemary E. Fei" <rfei@adlercolvin.com <mailto:rfei@adlercolvin.com> <mailto:rfei@adlercolvin.com <mailto:rfei@adlercolvin.com>>>, "ICANN@adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN@adlercolvin.com> <mailto:ICANN@adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN@adlercolvin.com>>" <ICANN@adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN@adlercolvin.com> <mailto:ICANN@adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN@adlercolvin.com>>>, Sidley ICANN CCWG < <mailto:sidleyicannccwg@sidley.com>sidleyicannccwg@sidley.com <mailto:sidleyicannccwg@sidley.com> <mailto:sidleyicannccwg@sidley.com <mailto:sidleyicannccwg@sidley.com>>>, "Samantha.Eisner@icann.org <mailto:Samantha.Eisner@icann.org> <mailto:Samantha.Eisner@icann.org <mailto:Samantha.Eisner@icann.org>>" <Samantha.Eisner@icann.org <mailto:Samantha.Eisner@icann.org> <mailto: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> <mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com <mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com>> www.sidley.com <http://www.sidley.com/> < <http://www.sidley.com/>http://www.sidley.com/ <http://www.sidley.com/>>____
http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png <http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png> <http://www.sidley.com/ <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> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community <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> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community <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 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community>
-- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org <http://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 <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community <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 <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