I think its a great idea: pleased to help. Susan Ariel Aaronson On 3/17/2015 1:33 PM, cc-humanrights-request@icann.org wrote:

Send cc-humanrights mailing list submissions to cc-humanrights@icann.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-humanrights or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to cc-humanrights-request@icann.org

You can reach the person managing the list at cc-humanrights-owner@icann.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of cc-humanrights digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. Considerations on next steps (Jean-Jacques Sahel) 2. Update and draft charter CCWP HR (Niels ten Oever)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1 Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 17:28:49 +0000 From: Jean-Jacques Sahel <jean-jacques.sahel@icann.org> To: "cc-humanrights@icann.org" <cc-humanrights@icann.org> Subject: [cc-humanrights] Considerations on next steps Message-ID: <2f446d22273e447f881dc7425dde6367@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dear all, Following on from discussions in Singapore, here are a few observations which we hope will help you in assessing next steps in your work around human rights.

Overall, as a start we would encourage you to use this list as a tool to let the discussion mature, in particular regarding objectives, modalities and feasibility - as an informal "working party" if you will. To provide you with some further food for thought:

* There is no particular definition of a "working party" as a formal structure within ICANN. To have a process established as a formal structure within ICANN it could either take the form of a Working Group (under the behest of any interested SO/AC), or a Cross-Community Working Group (with multiple SO/ACs as Chartering organizations) or as a Working Group instituted by the Board (like the Geographic Regions Working Group) or committees launched by the CEO (e.g. various discussion groups in the past).

- Before deciding on a particular structure, you need to be clear what the objective / scope is and from that, which mechanism is best suited to achieve them. It probably would be helpful that those interested in this effort would first define and agree on the objective and scope of such an effort, so as to help determine whether a CCWG or Working Group, or else such as a fact-finding ad hoc group, is the most appropriate mechanism for achieving the agreed objective. (The reason to set up a CCWG, for example, can be to assess the effectiveness of an existing procedure; or produce a fact-finding document; or a set of recommendations; first for SO/AC approval, then for submission to the ICANN Board).

* You will also need to establish a specific methodology; first, you may want to consider here to do some fact-finding and agree on the focus of the work, so as to be able to start familiarising others in the community with the ideas and objectives at stake. This could eventually take the form of a charter or statement of work that interested parties could sign up to.

- As an example, should the objective / scope be to provide recommendations to the Board that are developed jointly by a number of SO/ACs, then you may want to consider pursuing a CCWG. This would require at a minimum two SO/ACs that would serve as the chartering organisations for such an effort. The formation of a CCWG is typically at the initiative of an SO/AC - the chair or representative of an SO/AC will approach the other SO/ACs to determine whether there is interest to form a CCWG on a particular topic. If so, a small number of representatives are requested to participate in the drafting team that is responsible for developing a charter. Once the drafting team has completed its work, the charter is submitted to all the interested SO/ACs for approval according to their own processes. (Based on recent experiences running CWG/CCWG, we have good illustrations available that can help as a starting point for any drafting effort). In order to charter a Cross-Communit! y W orking Group, two or more SO/ACs would need to adopt the charter. So for NCSG and ALAC for example, they would need to get the GNSO as a whole to support the process. As raised during the Human Rights workshop at ICANN52, SO/ACs deciding on the creation of new workstreams normally involves consideration of the current workload and priorities. You may also want to think of who could be the 'champions' of the issue across different SO/ACs, who can start organising the discussion in a more structured manner.

- Note that as mentioned above, there are also other (ad-hoc) mechanisms that could be pursued depending on the objective, such as a WG or discussion group.

- You will also want to take into account that in its Singapore Communique, the GAC resolved to create a dedicated working group to look at this issue. It will be important to make sure there is linkage / coordination with other initiatives that are ongoing or have commenced elsewhere on the subject. (from the GAC Communique: "9. International Law, Human Rights and ICANN - The GAC decided to establish a Working Group on Human Rights Issues and the Application of International Law as these matters relate to ICANN activities. The GAC will also monitor community developments and consider how any GAC initiatives can complement any such developments.")

All the best,

Jean-Jacques

Vice-President, Global Stakeholder Engagement (Europe & Civil Society) ICANN

Tel: +44 77 400 73176 Skype: jean-jacques.sahel.icann Email: jean-jacques.sahel@icann.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jean-jacques.sahel@icann.org');> @pointjjs

One World, One Internet [cid:689AB906-EEAC-46C8-8257-7506F7B78BD8]