Hello
I already made a comment on the chat during CCWG call today, making it here again.
I think the human rights language in the summary is a bit confusing. "Reinforcing Adherence to Human Rights Protocols" (pages 7, 8, 31) is not exactly what WP4 proposed. The word "protocols" makes no sense in this context, it will be good either for diplomatic language or for IETF, but not for the CCWG document. As far as I am concerned, we are not suggesting to commit to any "protocols", furthermore, we even decided not to suggest to mention any instruments. Even within the context of international human rights law mentioning "protocols" doesn't make any sense.
I believe just "human rights" or "internationally recognised human rights" would be much better wording. But not "protocols" because it is confusing.
Best regards
Tanya

On 09/11/15 22:42, Bernard Turcotte wrote:

All,

Please find attached the first full draft of the executive summary which will be discussed on the call tomorrow.

Apologies for the delay in getting this out but people have been working almost around the clock.

Bernard Turcotte

Staff Support

for the co-chairs.

_______________________________________________
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

-- 

Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology 
mshears@cdt.org
+ 44 771 247 2987 

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com