Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Human Rights Subgroup Meeting #7 - 27 September 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/sAC4Aw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes 1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc 2. Analysis of Ruggie Principles for ICANN - discussion on UN Guiding Principles 15, 13, 19 3. AOB Notes including relevant elements from the chat: Tijani Ben Jemaa: Support GS. Anne Aikman-Scalese: @Chris - I don't know how we can say in the FOI0HR that due diligence process and remediation process can be adopted without an ICANN policy process. Annex 6 says we must consider these items consistent with ICANN existing processes David McAuley (RySG): +1 @ Tijani Farzaneh Badii: b9 and c9? where is that? Vague Brett Schaefer: b and c seems to cross the line established in the Core Value -- "This Core Value does not obligate ICANN to enforce its human rights obligations, or the human rights obligations of other parties, against other parties." Greg Shatan: sophism: a fallacious argument, especially one used deliberately to deceive. Tatiana Tropina 2: where did will land? can we have a quick summary? Have we got food for thoughts? Agreed to disagree at this point? :) Niels ten oever: Let us move to Principle 13. David McAuley (RySG): Principle 13 - the word "address" is vague and possibly out of scope Chris LaHatte: i understand we have a specific task, so Anne, I understand the restrictions of our tasks, but I don't want adoption of empty principles Tatiano Tropina: ccTLDs cannot be included in any due diligence. Chris LaHatte: so if a cctld does something like censorship or worse can we still criticize them? Anne Aikman-Scalese: @Chris - the principle is not empty if it then produces further action down the road - e.g. a requirement that PDP consider and assess the FOI-HR regardless of the nature of the PDP. David McAuley (RySG): I think I agreed with you @Kavouss - "address" is vague - I'd be surprised if I did not think so before Greg Shatan: 13B is clearly out of our scope. David McAuley (RySG): 13(b) is very broad - seems way out of scope matthew shears: yep Paul McGrady 2: @Avri - I don't hear anyone saying that they don't know what Mr. Ruggie is saying. Even so, isn't the first step would be to determine what human rights obligations ICANN has under applicable law, not turning first to third party resources (especially if those resources are so ambiguous that we need their author to explain what they mean)? Chris LaHatte: @anne, as long as that happens Niels ten Oever 2: @Greg + Tatiana, for ccTLDs and gTLDS or any business relations? Tatiana Tropina 2: David, not only out of scope but opens the room for claims about Niels ten Oever 2: @Greg + Tatiana, for ccTLDs and gTLDS or any business relations? Tatiana Tropina 2: David, not only out of scope but opens the room for claims about enforcement Avri Doria: not the definition in wikipedia - it is a for of Rhetoric used to convince people of a PoV. does not need to be fallacious and does not need to confuse, can even be a educational technique. Niels ten Oever 2: Paul I think only talked about ccTLDs Tatiana Tropina 2: Niels, for any business relations because it's enforcement... Tatiana Tropina 2: and protection! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Agree totally Greg enforcement Paul McGrady 2: Agree with Greg. 13(b) seems to be already excluded under a clear reading of the bylaws requiring that ICANN not get involved in the business of third party enforcement. David McAuley (RySG): not sure I understand the context of ccTLDs and gTLDs comment, Niels Kavous Arasteh: uncertain why people against mitigation and remediation. Avri Doria: what about in ICANN's own activities? Tatiana Tropina 2: Paul, Greg, +1. matthew shears: while I think Ruggie important, I believe we have to first interpret: 1) agree what "respecting human rights" means; 2) agree the "international human rights" and what is appropriate for ICANN, and 3) agree what "applicable law" means in this case" and perhaps return to Ruggie later Niels ten Oever 2: Because if I remember correctly Paul Twomey's argument it was specifically focused on ccTLDs Niels ten Oever 2: Because if I remember correctly Paul Twomey's argument it was specifically focused on ccTLDs Greg Shatan: Avri, I like the wikipedia definition better and thank you for clarifying your intended meaning. Tatiana Tropina 2: Niels, ccTLDs or gTLDs - no matter, (b) is enforcement and protection David McAuley (RySG): thanks @Niels Greg Shatan: Matthew -- agree 10000%,, that is the nub of our job. Niels ten Oever 2: know and show as well? Farzaneh Badii: Matt I agree. I think we should first agree on what "respecting human rights" means Greg Shatan: matthew shears: while I think Ruggie important, I believe we have to fiirst interpret: 1) agree what "respecting human rights" means; 2) agree the "international human rights" and what is appropriate for ICANN, and 3) agree what "applicable law" means in this case" and perhaps return to Ruggie later. Tatiana Tropina 2: Matt, hear hear! Bastiaan Goslings: I agree with Matt too Avri Doria: i think that if the FoI does not include the avoidance of causing harm by our activities, we might as well have a null text for the FoI. Brett Schaefer: Agree with Matt, the discussion seems to presume that Ruggie is agreed to and the starting point for the FoI. It seems to be jumping several important steps. Avri Doria: i see absolutely nothing here that requires content regulation Kavouss Arasteh: Avri+1 Chris LaHatte: +1 Avri Anne aikman-Scalese: Adopting 13 as is could take ICANN to content regulation which would be dangerous as it is outside of its mission and scope. Amdrew Mack: Support AAS - we should not be in content regulation. Paul McGrady 2: Ruggie is in the way of us actually discussing the process we should be on. Can we please start at the beginning instead of the (possible) end? David McAuley (RySG): I tend to agree w Avri's point and think we are experiencing problems trying to shoehorn Ruggie Principles into FoI Tatiana Tropina 2: David, agree with the latter. Kavous Arasteh: Need prevention and mitigation otherwise it is empty words. TatianaTropina: considering all principles imply that principle 13 is clearly interpreted elsewhere and goes to enforcement and protection which is beyond our remit. Anne Aikman-Scalese: AGree with Kavouss that the FOI-HR will require lots of further discussion and application to existing ICANN processes. Niels ten Oever 3: We are only looking at what we could like. With this we are not importing other principles. That is why we are discussing them one by one David McAuley (RySG): I think Tatiana put that well regarding 13(b) matthew shears: + 1 Tatiana Tatiana Tropina 2: Niels, one by one is cool but the lawyer in me always says that you have to interpret the provisions of the whole text in connection with other provisions of the same text. Avri Doria: i thought we had already decided by definiton that we were agains Ruggie principles Greg Shatan: these principles say ICANN's business principles should also respect Human Rights which could be an issue for ICANN. Niels ten Oever: @Greg is the document many different modalities are discussed - breaking relations with third parties should only be last resort (is what is in the Ruggie commentary). Tatiana Tropina 2: Niels, even as a last resort this would be sometimes impossible for ICANN Chris LaHatte: so we need to develop our own set of principles, and just use Ruggie et al as guidelines. Tatiana Tropina 2: Chris, I keep saying this Kavous Arasteh: (suggesting operation for the group by creating sub-teams for 13 and 15). matthew shears: I am ot sure we need to develop principles - let's agree the key focus areas of the bylaw first Greg Shatan: Agree, Chris. At best this is a launching pad for our consideration. Tatiana Tropina 2: Matt, well not literally develop principles but rather develop interpretation. matthew shears: yes Tatiana Tropina 2: 13 (a) with nuances... (for the record) Cláudio Lucena: Is there any concern on the potential scale of the adverse impacts on human rights we're looking at or are we treating all kinds of potential adverse impacts as similar? I'm thinking a general approach that does not address the potential scale of the impacts may pose much higher risks, costs and burdens than those which could be viably and reasonably handled by businesses. Greg Shatan: Agree with Matthew, we don't need to go all the way to principles -- we do need to figure out the parameters in which we interpret ICANN's actions. Avri Doria: i think we need principles not more constraints. guidelines not prohibitions Anne Aikman-Scalese: with respect to 13A and 15A do not agree there convergence because Address is not identified. Kavouss Arasteh: I have raised the point Address is unclear. Avri Doria: what harm do people find in the word address Avri Doria: why is ia a scary word? David McAuley (RySG): what does it mean, @Avri Greg Shatan: Agree that we have not completed discussion of (a). Tatiana Tropina 2: Me too. (a) is not finished. I want more of (a). Avri Doria: look at, discuss and come to some conclusion about. David McAuley (RySG): then we should use such term(s) David McAuley (RySG): in my opinion Avri Doria: it i longer to use a stock phrase than a term we defines, but ok, i guess. Bastiaan Goslings: I would at least want to add 'as required by applicable law.' to art 13a Anne Aikman-Scalese: I would not call 15 a or 13 a as "provisionally agreed" to be part of the FOI-HR - we did not go that far. Niels ten Oever: Adjourned. Documents Presented · HR_Presentation Meeting 6.pdf<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/62390448/HR_Presentation%20...>
