Dear All, Please note that the statement will be closed for any comments/feedback/edits at 12:00 UTC Friday,18th October, so that staff has time to format and submit. Kindly provide your feedback before this. [ The public interest is more of a political concept that usually accompanies other main principles like transparency and accountability. As mentioned in the paper there were many attempts in the past to define the public interest in relation to ICANN's remit that did not succeed. This is understandable because generally speaking it is difficult to pin down exactly what public interest means. Usually we look at the public interest in relation to the common good and common interest. The public interest in relation to ICANN's work should be scope and purpose specific. Therefore, trying to identify the public interest in relation to specific purposes or instances and how these instances link to ICANN's work as defined by its mission and bylaws makes sense. Also, in determining the public interest one should not only look at the outcome, but also at the process and procedures that led to the outcome and the proposed framework, takes into consideration ICANN's multistakeholder community and the policy development process. So, conceptually speaking the tool developed seems logical, however the problem lies in how we practically apply it or make use of it. In an attempt to actually use the tool, one could argue that two stakeholder groups with opposite opinions on the same subject matter could equally use the tool and each prove that his decision or comment is in the public interest. This is because both opinions could be complying with the mission and bylaws. Using the tool to justify one position over the other could prove in some cases to be not useful. However, after reaching a certain decision, the tool could be used to make sure that the decision or comment is in the public interest. To conclude the proposed GPI tool could be useful in determining what is not in the public interest and in noting how an already taken decision or comment serves the public interest. However, it will be challenging to use the tool to favor one path over another. ] Thank you Hadia Eng. Hadia Elminiawi (M.Sc.) Director, DNS-Entrepreneurship Center [Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/268513_180152888707645_7698168_n.jpg][logo] National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority Tel: +202 3534 4392 Fax: +202 3537 4000 Email: hadia@tra.gov.eg<https://mail.dnsec.eg/owa/redir.aspx?C=8f4aa197b9f840be8139d76b29a0df99&URL=...> From: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 12:25 PM To: 'cpwg@icann.org' Cc: ALAC Subject: RE: [community] ALAC > Action items: 2019-10-09 Consolidated Policy Working Group Call Dear All, Please find herein the final draft for the comment on the public interest framework, I have also updated the wiki page. Please take note that we shall need to post it tomorrow. Thanks The public interest is more of a political concept that usually accompanies other main principles like transparency and accountability. As mentioned in the paper there were many attempts in the past to define the public interest in relation to ICANN's remit that did not succeed. This is understandable because generally speaking it is difficult to pin down exactly what public interest means. Usually we look at the public interest in relation to the common good and common interest. The public interest in relation to ICANN's work should be scope and purpose specific. Therefore, trying to identify the public interest in relation to specific purposes or instances and how these instances link to ICANN's work as defined by its mission and bylaws makes sense. Also, in determining the public interest one should not only look at the outcome, but also at the process and procedures that led to the outcome and the proposed framework, takes into consideration ICANN's multistakeholder community and the policy development process. So, Conceptually speaking the tool developed seems logical, however the problem lies in how we practically apply it or make use of it. In an attempt to actually use the tool, one could argue that two stakeholder groups with opposite opinions on the same subject matter could equally use the tool and each prove that his decision or comment is in the public interest. This is because both opinions could be complying with the mission and bylaws. Using the tool to justify one position over the other could prove in some cases to be not useful. However, after reaching a certain decision, the tool could be used to make sure that the decision or comment is in the public interest. To conclude the proposed GPI tool could be useful in determining what is not in the public interest and in noting how an already taken decision or comment serves the public interest. However, it will be challenging to use the tool to favor one path over another. Eng. Hadia Elminiawi (M.Sc.) Director, DNS-Entrepreneurship Center [Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/268513_180152888707645_7698168_n.jpg][logo] National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority Tel: +202 3534 4392 Fax: +202 3537 4000 Email: hadia@tra.gov.eg<https://mail.dnsec.eg/owa/redir.aspx?C=8f4aa197b9f840be8139d76b29a0df99&URL=...> From: Evin Erdogdu (Confluence) [mailto:no-reply@icann.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 3:00 PM To: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi Subject: [community] ALAC > Action items: 2019-10-09 Consolidated Policy Working Group Call There's 6 new edits on this page [page icon]<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Action+items%3A+2019-10-09+Conso...> Action items: 2019-10-09 Consolidated Policy Working Group Call<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Action+items%3A+2019-10-09+Conso...> [cid:image007.png@01D584EE.BB7927E0] Evin Erdogdu edited this page Here's what changed: [☑] @Hadia Elminiawi</display/~hadia.elminiawi>to send EPDP II update (regarding blocks, et al) to the CPWG mailing list. [☑] @Justine Chew</display/~justine.chew> to continue with SubPro Deliberations - Appeals - on next CPWG call, with the following suggestion to be discussed on mailing list in the interim: What At-Large members have said in SubPro, could be put forward to ALAC: 1. ALAC has no funding ability beyond that supplied by ICANN. It is not feasible for ALAC to raise funds to finance an appeal or to bear costs if appeal is unsuccessful. Thus, it would be discriminatory to constrain ALAC from exercising its right to appeal because of no funding. Quantum/limits? Must commensurate with number of applications. The same argument could apply to ALAC's ability to file Objection. [☑] GeoNames Survey content and GeoNames video to be circulated next week (prior to next CPWG). @Jonathan Zuck</display/~jonathan.zuck> / @Evin Erdogdu</display/~evin.erdogdu> [☑] CPWG / At-Large to comment on ICANN66 Talking Points<https://drive.google.com/a/icann.org/file/d/1RaplmZAmAPnbVlm0L-3F3uDjcokeUL1...>. @Evin Erdogdu</display/~evin.erdogdu>to circulate on CPWG mailing list. [☐] Hadia suggested adding Public Interest to the CPWG Ingest Process, under Remit. CC @Jonathan Zuck</display/~jonathan.zuck> to move ALAC above policy remit as per Holly's recommendation; to add prose in between slides. [☑] @Evin Erdogdu</display/~evin.erdogdu> to submit Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=115642395> once finalized by penholder(s) / ALAC Chair. [☑] @Maureen Hilyard</display/~maureen.hilyard> to submit Amazon Public Interest Commitments (PICs) 2019<https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+Amaz...> comment from CPWG/At-Large by 14 Oct. CC: @Evin Erdogdu</display/~evin.erdogdu> [☑] @Hadia Elminiawi</display/~hadia.elminiawi> to draft Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework<https://community.icann.org/x/aZQCBw> based off comments on wiki page [☑] @Evin Erdogdu</display/~evin.erdogdu> to circulate Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework<https://community.icann.org/x/aZQCBw> workspace on the mailing list for comment. [☑] @Claudia Ruiz</display/~claudia.ruiz> / support team to set up next call for 16 Oct 13:00 UTC. Go to page history<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpreviousversions.action?pageId=1176099...> View page<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Action+items%3A+2019-10-09+Conso...> Stop watching space<https://community.icann.org/users/removespacenotification.action?spaceKey=at...> • Manage notifications<https://community.icann.org/users/editmyemailsettings.action?src=mail&src.ma...> This message was sent by Atlassian Confluence 6.15.8
