Dear David, We agreed on a interpretation of this in the explanatory text, so I would disagree with changing the interpretation and implementation of that now. Best, Niels On 04/07/2016 11:07 PM, McAuley, David wrote:
And second, about human rights, specificallyan implication in Article 27.3.(c) that HR claims might be a proper subject for RR or IRP after the FOI is developed.
This implication is not in the Annex 06 bylaw text (paragraph 23), although it appears in explanatory text (paragraph 19). But both bylaw text and explanatory text say that acceptance of the FOI will depend on the same processes followed in WS1, and bylaw text makes clear that the FOI has to be approved by the Board after it follows the same process and criteria it used in WS1.
In my opinion it is a mistake to insert this implication in “real” bylaws as the issue is important as well as complex and the WS2 FOI group should have a chance to debate the merits.
-- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9