According to the UN, Intl. Law includes a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states; b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law; c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; d. .(...)judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law. If we will have to list all specific categories, then lets leave it to WS2, because it is going to be a long and very specialised exercise beyond the special fiel of Human Rights Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez +506 8837 7176 Skype: carlos.raulg On 27 Jul 2015, at 10:19, Nigel Roberts wrote:
In other words, "Does NTIA's disengagement introduce risk that ICANN could disregard its existing human rights obligations under international law?"
Whilst I appreciate the creative restatement, this is most certainly NOT the question.
ICANN *has* no existing human rights obligations under international law. Zero. Zip. Nada.
And that is of concern.
It has some fundamental rights obligations under California Law and the Art. 4 of the Articles of Association, but this has proved woolly and less than effective. (Ask both ICM and DCA about whether ICANN, in the exercise of discretion as a decision-maker respects the fair hearing right, for example).
We need to somehow infuse ICANN with a culture of respect for fundamental rights, such as the right to intellectual property (currently well covered) and the rights to fair hearing, the right to privacy and the right to free expression (the latter rights covered much less so than the former). _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community