Hello Olivier, My understanding is that further details will be developed in WS2. If the outcome of that process only involve sticking within the scope of "Within it's mission, ICANN will respect human rights" then fine. But there is a "internationally recognised" clause in the current wording. IMO that's the devil in the details that I look forward to seeing Regards On Dec 15, 2015 5:05 PM, "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl@gih.com> wrote: Dear Seun, comments inline: On 15/12/2015 10:00, Seun Ojedeji wrote: On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:

Dear Seun,

just a few points:

On 15/12/2015 05:14, Seun Ojedeji wrote:

...

- line 93: Supporting inclusion of human rights in the bylaw is too strong a statement. I'd suggest that it be conditioned on seeing the actual bylaw text. Maybe we should even ask ourselves whether any form of human rights text be included in the bylaw? If I were to answer, my response will be that; for a technical organisation like ICANN, I'd say NO.

ICANN performs some tasks which some Governments have said should be performed by Governments. The current emphasis on Human Rights is such that corporations and non-profits that have a strong public interest component and that perform such tasks incorporate Human Rights text. There is a cross community working party that has worked for over a year on this and the idea has gone a long way from when it was first mentioned. It is a side issue - let's not be the Advisory Committee that takes position against this.

SO: I would look forward to human rights wording in the bylaw that would ONLY achieve the purpose you've stated above. Do you not think that the language which is currently included is suitable to explicitly state that the acknowledgement of HR does not provide any additional right? I felt that the section was well written. It is highly unlikely that at this stage we'll be able to convince anyone to remove this section, bearing in mind the level of support that it has gained from other communities. In addition, it would reflect really badly on the ALAC to oppose a section on human rights. I'd suggest we have much more concerns with other parts of the report. Kindest regards, Olivier