draft language for certification to lawyers on HR question
All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow. *** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits. We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. *** Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the languag e: *** In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits. We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated. *** Best, Niels On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
- -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRmQAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpKukH/R8EhC2tCyF4qGYNzS7L4Qn3 Oloj8IoIpinFRIGnB3aGLUgGJSI9NykuLNTJ0/BIcG4Gfy8qUIKpL8M/USpoasgd 4S3p+jQRrR2SgU9TTSY0LfWvQpY5EZVJ0qSqkREEeBSAhjeiO/A9QS1B54goamOP ur9BToZwKeeNUdesznkcQeM+jLnxvG418EERjIf/p7luMO0WGEYlfM7X05tS6tHp 3cJcV22cVqPj5PkpHP6WxsOBMCVARWEa6x6221yYH7uVM+SfYRHH+KYzKKOTffe1 medmWat4kAtqKpYcGY9IrYhmjaq/VZn/4SJZiDq6CGzWIDsFD8ThrCg411vbXLc= =i0fO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 If you would permit me, I have a small process question: The proposed text on human rights in the CCWG report has already been reviewed by lawyers (at the time it was prepared by WP4). Were these the same lawyers that will answer the proposed question underneath? If so, have they not checked for these risks the last time? If so, this could save us some time. Best, Niels On 01/06/2016 02:41 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the language:
***
In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated.
***
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ 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
- -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRvcAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpiL4H/08f9uvS7Re/f6pxH06Hbjei aWAXLigeqlsKdYJQGPRhe5hOYpvw48huNC6ed6wbfjHgqPbHyHzAjThsGu4z5GB5 5NQYufmBtjvgs2j2n6MiwJFQx1cQVv54gwe6tPTWG1G1qZGc9uat2eFY4G609lSi DImT1FTnuGcTOuNdEX6sWJsx+IAcgKLYbs9yXUzAHeUIX0WeKFdbwxBMbvMHpfVX 0XZvfz9t8QPUD7hhaApWio34NV9h9nTw17/F4kg0oNlZLT4l7RTxSH4vgTI7RD5Y yNa/RZriZAOhEyODuyjpsCbjetg/kReol9RGEHKt5LO079HwTZN4LO4TvTd/qKQ= =vdV0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I'd still like to know which Human Rights ICANN is thinking of infringing? The more the CCWG drags on, the more I looking at Art. 5 UDHR . . On 06/01/16 13:51, Niels ten Oever wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
If you would permit me, I have a small process question:
The proposed text on human rights in the CCWG report has already been reviewed by lawyers (at the time it was prepared by WP4). Were these the same lawyers that will answer the proposed question underneath? If so, have they not checked for these risks the last time? If so, this could save us some time.
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:41 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the language:
***
In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated.
***
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ 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
- -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRvcAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpiL4H/08f9uvS7Re/f6pxH06Hbjei aWAXLigeqlsKdYJQGPRhe5hOYpvw48huNC6ed6wbfjHgqPbHyHzAjThsGu4z5GB5 5NQYufmBtjvgs2j2n6MiwJFQx1cQVv54gwe6tPTWG1G1qZGc9uat2eFY4G609lSi DImT1FTnuGcTOuNdEX6sWJsx+IAcgKLYbs9yXUzAHeUIX0WeKFdbwxBMbvMHpfVX 0XZvfz9t8QPUD7hhaApWio34NV9h9nTw17/F4kg0oNlZLT4l7RTxSH4vgTI7RD5Y yNa/RZriZAOhEyODuyjpsCbjetg/kReol9RGEHKt5LO079HwTZN4LO4TvTd/qKQ= =vdV0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Nigel, I could be wrong, but I do not read the Board’s comments as a concern that ICANN intends act in a manner that would infringe on HR. I read them as a concern that an HR commitment could lead to claims or lawsuits resulting from ICANN failing to act and that the resulting court rulings or IRP determinations could result in an expansion of ICANN’s mission in ways that are not currently envisioned or, in the words of the Board, “result in an expansion of ICANN’s Mission in ways that the community does not support.” The CCWG has repeatedly stated that it wants ICANN to adhere strictly to a narrow scope and mission. The Board has raised a concern that this provision could be in conflict with that goal. It is up to the CCWG to argue convincingly that this is not the case or, if the concern is valid, edit the draft to address this concern. Best, Brett ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Nigel Roberts Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 8:56 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] draft language for certification to lawyers on HR question I'd still like to know which Human Rights ICANN is thinking of infringing? The more the CCWG drags on, the more I looking at Art. 5 UDHR . . On 06/01/16 13:51, Niels ten Oever wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
If you would permit me, I have a small process question:
The proposed text on human rights in the CCWG report has already been reviewed by lawyers (at the time it was prepared by WP4). Were these the same lawyers that will answer the proposed question underneath? If so, have they not checked for these risks the last time? If so, this could save us some time.
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:41 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the language:
***
In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated.
***
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ 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>
- -- 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 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRvcAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpiL4H/08f9uvS7Re/f6pxH06Hbjei aWAXLigeqlsKdYJQGPRhe5hOYpvw48huNC6ed6wbfjHgqPbHyHzAjThsGu4z5GB5 5NQYufmBtjvgs2j2n6MiwJFQx1cQVv54gwe6tPTWG1G1qZGc9uat2eFY4G609lSi DImT1FTnuGcTOuNdEX6sWJsx+IAcgKLYbs9yXUzAHeUIX0WeKFdbwxBMbvMHpfVX 0XZvfz9t8QPUD7hhaApWio34NV9h9nTw17/F4kg0oNlZLT4l7RTxSH4vgTI7RD5Y yNa/RZriZAOhEyODuyjpsCbjetg/kReol9RGEHKt5LO079HwTZN4LO4TvTd/qKQ= =vdV0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 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>
Infringing on Article 5 goes right along with one of the standard ICANN methodologies - no good deed shall go unpunished (or so it seems at times). For those who have not done their homework, Article 5 is "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." Alan At 06/01/2016 08:55 AM, Nigel Roberts wrote:
I'd still like to know which Human Rights ICANN is thinking of infringing?
The more the CCWG drags on, the more I looking at Art. 5 UDHR . .
On 06/01/16 13:51, Niels ten Oever wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
If you would permit me, I have a small process question:
The proposed text on human rights in the CCWG report has already been reviewed by lawyers (at the time it was prepared by WP4). Were these the same lawyers that will answer the proposed question underneath? If so, have they not checked for these risks the last time? If so, this could save us some time.
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:41 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the language:
***
In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated.
***
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
All, as discussed during yesterday's CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board's concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ 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
- -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRvcAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpiL4H/08f9uvS7Re/f6pxH06Hbjei aWAXLigeqlsKdYJQGPRhe5hOYpvw48huNC6ed6wbfjHgqPbHyHzAjThsGu4z5GB5 5NQYufmBtjvgs2j2n6MiwJFQx1cQVv54gwe6tPTWG1G1qZGc9uat2eFY4G609lSi DImT1FTnuGcTOuNdEX6sWJsx+IAcgKLYbs9yXUzAHeUIX0WeKFdbwxBMbvMHpfVX 0XZvfz9t8QPUD7hhaApWio34NV9h9nTw17/F4kg0oNlZLT4l7RTxSH4vgTI7RD5Y yNa/RZriZAOhEyODuyjpsCbjetg/kReol9RGEHKt5LO079HwTZN4LO4TvTd/qKQ= =vdV0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 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
Niels, We trust it has been checked for risks, but since the Board has raised the issue and possible added new ideas to the discussion of risks, we should have this double-checked. Best, Thomas --- rickert.net
Am 06.01.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Niels ten Oever <lists@digitaldissidents.org>:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
If you would permit me, I have a small process question:
The proposed text on human rights in the CCWG report has already been reviewed by lawyers (at the time it was prepared by WP4). Were these the same lawyers that will answer the proposed question underneath? If so, have they not checked for these risks the last time? If so, this could save us some time.
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:41 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote: Hi all,
I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the language:
***
In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated.
***
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote: All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ 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
Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRvcAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpiL4H/08f9uvS7Re/f6pxH06Hbjei aWAXLigeqlsKdYJQGPRhe5hOYpvw48huNC6ed6wbfjHgqPbHyHzAjThsGu4z5GB5 5NQYufmBtjvgs2j2n6MiwJFQx1cQVv54gwe6tPTWG1G1qZGc9uat2eFY4G609lSi DImT1FTnuGcTOuNdEX6sWJsx+IAcgKLYbs9yXUzAHeUIX0WeKFdbwxBMbvMHpfVX 0XZvfz9t8QPUD7hhaApWio34NV9h9nTw17/F4kg0oNlZLT4l7RTxSH4vgTI7RD5Y yNa/RZriZAOhEyODuyjpsCbjetg/kReol9RGEHKt5LO079HwTZN4LO4TvTd/qKQ= =vdV0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
+1 on both counts, with minor modification. Would suggest inclusion of the words in bold in the second paragraph ".... the inclusion *of the language as proposed in the 3rd draft* in the bylaws would...". Regards On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Niels ten Oever <lists@digitaldissidents.org
wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hi all,
I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the languag e:
***
In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated.
***
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
- -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRmQAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpKukH/R8EhC2tCyF4qGYNzS7L4Qn3 Oloj8IoIpinFRIGnB3aGLUgGJSI9NykuLNTJ0/BIcG4Gfy8qUIKpL8M/USpoasgd 4S3p+jQRrR2SgU9TTSY0LfWvQpY5EZVJ0qSqkREEeBSAhjeiO/A9QS1B54goamOP ur9BToZwKeeNUdesznkcQeM+jLnxvG418EERjIf/p7luMO0WGEYlfM7X05tS6tHp 3cJcV22cVqPj5PkpHP6WxsOBMCVARWEa6x6221yYH7uVM+SfYRHH+KYzKKOTffe1 medmWat4kAtqKpYcGY9IrYhmjaq/VZn/4SJZiDq6CGzWIDsFD8ThrCg411vbXLc= =i0fO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Sounds like a reasonable specification Regards Jorge -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Niels ten Oever Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. Januar 2016 14:42 An: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] draft language for certification to lawyers on HR question -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the languag e: *** In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits. We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated. *** Best, Niels On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
All, as discussed during yesterday's CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board's concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
- -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRmQAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpKukH/R8EhC2tCyF4qGYNzS7L4Qn3 Oloj8IoIpinFRIGnB3aGLUgGJSI9NykuLNTJ0/BIcG4Gfy8qUIKpL8M/USpoasgd 4S3p+jQRrR2SgU9TTSY0LfWvQpY5EZVJ0qSqkREEeBSAhjeiO/A9QS1B54goamOP ur9BToZwKeeNUdesznkcQeM+jLnxvG418EERjIf/p7luMO0WGEYlfM7X05tS6tHp 3cJcV22cVqPj5PkpHP6WxsOBMCVARWEa6x6221yYH7uVM+SfYRHH+KYzKKOTffe1 medmWat4kAtqKpYcGY9IrYhmjaq/VZn/4SJZiDq6CGzWIDsFD8ThrCg411vbXLc= =i0fO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Also support this language suggestion. On 07/01/2016 07:49, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Sounds like a reasonable specification
Regards
Jorge
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Niels ten Oever Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. Januar 2016 14:42 An: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] draft language for certification to lawyers on HR question
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hi all,
I would like to thank the co-chairs for their suggestion at the end of yesterdays call. Please allow me to make some suggestions to the languag e:
***
In their comment to the 3rd CCWG draft report the ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment whether the inclusion of these bylaws would increase the risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits vis a vis the current situation (taking into account the existing obligations under article 4 of ICANNs articles of incorporation), and if so, how such risk could be mitigated.
***
Best,
Niels
On 01/06/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
All, as discussed during yesterday's CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board's concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
- -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
Article 19 www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWjRmQAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpKukH/R8EhC2tCyF4qGYNzS7L4Qn3 Oloj8IoIpinFRIGnB3aGLUgGJSI9NykuLNTJ0/BIcG4Gfy8qUIKpL8M/USpoasgd 4S3p+jQRrR2SgU9TTSY0LfWvQpY5EZVJ0qSqkREEeBSAhjeiO/A9QS1B54goamOP ur9BToZwKeeNUdesznkcQeM+jLnxvG418EERjIf/p7luMO0WGEYlfM7X05tS6tHp 3cJcV22cVqPj5PkpHP6WxsOBMCVARWEa6x6221yYH7uVM+SfYRHH+KYzKKOTffe1 medmWat4kAtqKpYcGY9IrYhmjaq/VZn/4SJZiDq6CGzWIDsFD8ThrCg411vbXLc= =i0fO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 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. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Hi Thomas, Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the certification. In yesterday’s call we had an example of an issue that would clearly benefit from legal advice – managing the risk of defamation-related litigation stemming from an effort to remove an individual board member (it seems the same risk would apply to an effort to recall the entire board as well). The issue was specific and involved the threat of a particular form of litigation which generally exists, with some variations, all across the world. In this human rights certification it seems we have an example of an issue for which legal advice might be premature. The certification seems very broad and could invoke a discussion about litigation in almost every country on the planet. It seems impractical to get legal advice that wide-ranging. Moreover, the board’s principal concern with the current proposal, at least as I read it, is that it may create an invitation for HR lawyers to use the language in an attempt to expand ICANN’s remit. This statement of the board’s concern strikes me as key: “While the language itself does not – in itself – create any additional obligation for ICANN, others could rely on the language to attempt to define new obligations that the community does not support.” The board then went on to point out some very plausible examples of their concern. It raised reasonable points that need to be addressed but which seem unlikely to benefit from a general legal assessment at this moment. Pending the development of an HR framework in WS2, it seems appropriate to ask for legal input simply aimed at minimizing unintended consequences of the present language until the HR work in WS2 is finished. David McAuley -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Rickert Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 8:14 AM To: Accountability Cross Community Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] draft language for certification to lawyers on HR question All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow. *** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits. We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. *** Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
Thanks, David. I agree we should not seek a global survey and that we should involve the lawyers more in WS2. However, it is my view that the group is in favour of having our analysis of the Board concern informed by our legal advisors. Thank you and kind regards, Thomas --- rickert.net
Am 06.01.2016 um 17:15 schrieb McAuley, David <dmcauley@verisign.com>:
Hi Thomas,
Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the certification.
In yesterday’s call we had an example of an issue that would clearly benefit from legal advice – managing the risk of defamation-related litigation stemming from an effort to remove an individual board member (it seems the same risk would apply to an effort to recall the entire board as well). The issue was specific and involved the threat of a particular form of litigation which generally exists, with some variations, all across the world.
In this human rights certification it seems we have an example of an issue for which legal advice might be premature.
The certification seems very broad and could invoke a discussion about litigation in almost every country on the planet. It seems impractical to get legal advice that wide-ranging.
Moreover, the board’s principal concern with the current proposal, at least as I read it, is that it may create an invitation for HR lawyers to use the language in an attempt to expand ICANN’s remit. This statement of the board’s concern strikes me as key: “While the language itself does not – in itself – create any additional obligation for ICANN, others could rely on the language to attempt to define new obligations that the community does not support.” The board then went on to point out some very plausible examples of their concern.
It raised reasonable points that need to be addressed but which seem unlikely to benefit from a general legal assessment at this moment. Pending the development of an HR framework in WS2, it seems appropriate to ask for legal input simply aimed at minimizing unintended consequences of the present language until the HR work in WS2 is finished.
David McAuley
-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Rickert Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 8:14 AM To: Accountability Cross Community Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] draft language for certification to lawyers on HR question
All, as discussed during yesterday’s CCWG call, please find below the draft certification language to be sent to the lawyers with respect to the human rights recommendation and the Board’s concerns about legal risks. I plan to certify at 14.00 UTC tomorrow.
*** The ICANN Board has raised concerns that the proposed inclusion of language in the bylaws with respect to human rights might lead to an increased risk of ICANN being exposed to legal claims or even law suits.
We would appreciate if you could provide us with a brief assessment and suggestions on how such risk can be mitigated. It is our understanding that human rights have been indirectly referred to in ICANN's bylaws already, so please also indicate whether (according to your assessment) the language that shall be added to the bylaws according to our 3rd report is establishing a new risk or an increased risk, if any. ***
Kind regards, Thomas Rickert
participants (10)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Jorge.Cancio＠bakom.admin.ch -
Matthew Shears -
McAuley, David -
Niels ten Oever -
Nigel Roberts -
Schaefer, Brett -
Seun Ojedeji -
Thomas Rickert -
Thomas Rickert