Thanks for this Collin, Would this mean it would be useful to send in public comments to allocate funding to WS2 implementation, and not make it contingent? Am happy to send a comment in, but would be great if someone who followed the discussion more closely could help draft? Maybe based on the argument that WS2 _needs_ to be implemented, because that was the premise of the transition. Best, Niels On 2/5/19 6:30 PM, Collin Kurre wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I’m writing with an update from the recent ICANN Board Open Session on WS2 implementation, held 27 January in LA. The basic goals of the session were to clarify when the board will make a decision on approving the WS2 Recommendations, on what basis, and how the community will be consulted. If you’ve got 30 minutes to spare, you can watch the session here: https://participate.icann.org/p8wsolrzf59/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pb... If not, notes from the session follow.
As you may recall, only one of the WS2 recommendations pertains to human rights — the recommendation that the board adopt the proposed Framework of Interpretation, thereby effecting the dormant Human Rights Bylaw. However, there are 111 more recommendations from seven other topics included in the WS2 package. Find them here: https://community.icann.org/display/WEIA/Documents
This package of recommendations was sent to the ICANN Board for approval on 8 November 2018. In theory, the Board should make their decision within 6 months. That timeline doesn’t seem to be binding, however, and there are a few things that need to happen first:
* Small Implementation Team of WS2 Co-Chairs / Rapporteurs assembled to assist and provide advice as needed * Board will convene a “Caucus Group” to follow WS2 Implementation and report back on progress * Org will produce an Implementation Assessment Report to help Board consider report and feasibility of adopting recommendations as a package
The Implementation Assessment Report was described as a high-level document to help set expectations with the community and provide info on timing, costs, and dependencies. It’s not meant to provide guidance on tradeoffs that may be needed with other things like implementation of new policies or innovation of existing programs or services. Those decisions will have to be made in consultation with the community, although it’s not yet clear how or when that will occur.
Notably, attention was drawn to the fact that resources have only been allocated to WS2 as a contingency in the draft FY20 budget. The justification for not including WS2 in the draft budget doesn’t look promising in terms of timelines:
/When the WS2 Working Group completes its recommendations, the Board considers an implementation plan that includes the necessary resources. Until approved, the Board works with the community to identify the resources needed for implementation. Therefore, no resources are included for any implementation work until the Board adopts the recommendations./
Community members are reminded that the public comment period on this draft budget is open for another 3 days, closing on Friday 8 Feb: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/fy20-budget-2018-12-17-en
Kind regards,
Collin Kurre CCWP-HR Co-Chair
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
-- Niels ten Oever Researcher and PhD Candidate DATACTIVE Research Group University of Amsterdam PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3