Input from SSAC to the WG on Human Rights
Niels, As chair of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee, one of the chartering organizations of the CCWG on Accountability, we would like to submit the attached comments as fruit for thought for the discussions. Best, Patrik Fältström Chair of the SSAC
This is an insightful and constructive input. I would agree that something like Human Rights Impact Assessments are appropriate in relation to an entity such as ICANN, and in fact are as far as such an entity can hold itself to. ICANN can't, however, address the question of human rights in the international arena adequately in terms of its own responsibility in any case. This does not mean that human rights are properly addressed this way though: it reflects a misplaced tendency to try to make it something ICANN can handle itself. The key question is not really about "putting a human rights rule on" ICANN; it's what to do about rights in relation to governments once you go international. That would be how you'd address the issue, even though what you come up with wouldn't be about binding ICANN -- beyond issuing impact assessments and whatever (limited, frankly) extent those apply to itself. Seth On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf@netnod.se> wrote:
Niels,
As chair of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee, one of the chartering organizations of the CCWG on Accountability, we would like to submit the attached comments as fruit for thought for the discussions.
Best,
Patrik Fältström Chair of the SSAC
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Seth Johnson <seth.p.johnson@gmail.com> wrote:
This is an insightful and constructive input.
I would agree that something like Human Rights Impact Assessments are appropriate in relation to an entity such as ICANN, and in fact are as far as such an entity can hold itself to.
ICANN can't, however, address the question of human rights in the international arena adequately in terms of its own responsibility in any case.
This does not mean that human rights are properly addressed this way though: it reflects a misplaced tendency to try to make it something ICANN can handle itself.
The key question is not really about "putting a human rights rule on" ICANN; it's what to do about rights in relation to governments once you go international. That would be how you'd address the issue, even though what you come up with wouldn't be about binding ICANN -- beyond issuing impact assessments and whatever (limited, frankly) extent those apply to itself.
It's a matter that's outward facing, not about "What does ICANN have to do?" -- beyond the need at this moment to proceed only on the basis of forging the future course properly. Seth
Seth
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf@netnod.se> wrote:
Niels,
As chair of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee, one of the chartering organizations of the CCWG on Accountability, we would like to submit the attached comments as fruit for thought for the discussions.
Best,
Patrik Fältström Chair of the SSAC
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
Dear Patrik and other members of the SSAC, I would like to thank you very much for this letter, and I would like to invite you to further discuss this letter coming Wednesday at 17:00 during our session at ICANN58 where we'll discuss HRIAs in more detail, also informed by a presentation provided by the Danish Institute for Human Rights on this topic. All the best, Niels Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3 On 03/13/2017 10:36 AM, Seth Johnson wrote:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Seth Johnson <seth.p.johnson@gmail.com> wrote:
This is an insightful and constructive input.
I would agree that something like Human Rights Impact Assessments are appropriate in relation to an entity such as ICANN, and in fact are as far as such an entity can hold itself to.
ICANN can't, however, address the question of human rights in the international arena adequately in terms of its own responsibility in any case.
This does not mean that human rights are properly addressed this way though: it reflects a misplaced tendency to try to make it something ICANN can handle itself.
The key question is not really about "putting a human rights rule on" ICANN; it's what to do about rights in relation to governments once you go international. That would be how you'd address the issue, even though what you come up with wouldn't be about binding ICANN -- beyond issuing impact assessments and whatever (limited, frankly) extent those apply to itself.
It's a matter that's outward facing, not about "What does ICANN have to do?" -- beyond the need at this moment to proceed only on the basis of forging the future course properly.
Seth
Seth
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf@netnod.se> wrote:
Niels,
As chair of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee, one of the chartering organizations of the CCWG on Accountability, we would like to submit the attached comments as fruit for thought for the discussions.
Best,
Patrik Fältström Chair of the SSAC
_______________________________________________ cc-humanrights mailing list cc-humanrights@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights
participants (3)
-
Niels ten Oever -
Patrik Fältström -
Seth Johnson