Thanks Farzi. I can appreciate the desire to respect a previous template as well as practice in the Human Rights field. For me, what is missing from this Charter is a specific reference to the Human Rights Core Value in the ICANN Bylaws which is to be applied in accordance with the Human Rights - Framework of Interpretation as recommended by Accountability Workstream 2 and as adopted by the ICANN Board. In the drafting team work, I asked for this governing document to be specifically referenced. John Emery added it as well as Annexing the Final Report of the Accountability Workstream II Sub Group on Human Rights. However, it was later deleted without further discussion in the drafting team other than a statement that the Latin Diacritics template governs, but the HR-FOI Report states as follows:"The interpretation of the Human Rights Core Value should be driven by the Framework of Interpretation. It is expected that the Core Value will be taken into account when future ICANN policies and procedures are developed, and interpreted in accordance with the Framework of Interpretation." (emphasis added)Accordingly I do not understand why anyone thinks that the Human Rights paragraph should not contain an express reference to the HR-FOI as adopted by the Board. Again, that document is linked here:My suggested change - which I understand from Jen is still open for discussion - is that the first sentence of the Human Rights paragraph in the Charter be modified by adding these simple words "in accordance with the Human Rights Framework of Interpretation as adopted by the ICANN Board." Again, staff had inserted this but it disappeared from the "final" version of the Charter.Please consider this a formal request for Council to add back that language into the Charter.Thank you,AnneOn Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 3:33 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:Dear Anne,
Thank you for the note. I need to clarify a few points to ensure the record accurately reflects NCSG’s position
NCSG has never stated that the very goal of this PDP poses a threat to Article 19. That characterization is incorrect. We have documented many many times our concerns with ADC which I invite you to have a look at.
The decision on whether to engage an external human rights expert should rest with the PDP Working Group, in consultation with the Council, if the WG deems this necessary. I do not support the Council pre-judging that decision at the chartering stage. Just like in EPDP on data registration when we needed external courses or experts we asked the council.
The description of “legitimacy” is not “Farzi’s definition.” It reflects standard human rights analysis used by practitioners and experts, including in human rights impact assessments. Determining how to apply HRIA tools including legitimacy analysis is squarely within the remit of the PDP Working Group. It is not within the Council’s mandate to prescribe or redefine what “legitimacy” means in human rights terms.
The human rights section included in PDP charters is a standard, Council adopted boilerplate. It was adopted following discussions with human rights experts. Any interpretation, expansion, or modification of those questions should occur through community processes, not unilateral Council reinterpretation.
The section on human rights checklist is only there to provide guidance for the PDP. It will not lead to expansion of PDP, it will not circumvent community decisions.
Best regardsFarzanehOn Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 4:46 PM Anne ICANN via council <council@icann.org> wrote:Thanks Jen. I look forward to the discussion on this Charter in relation to informing the Council members as to:(1) PDP WG Option to hire an outside expert firm to conduct a formal Human Rights Impact Assessment. (I agree with Farzi that this was a much simpler question in relation to the Latin Diacritics PDP. I understand from our December meeting the NCSG position that the very goal of this DNS Abuse EPDP poses a threat to Article 19 free speech rights.)(2) Farzi's explanation of the elements contained in the charge to the Working Group to answer Question 3 in the Human Rights paragraph, i.e. whether the proposed action is "legitimate" which she detailed as follows:"if the law and policies 1) were enacted through consent and participation 2) don't go against fundamental rights themselves - 3) there is fairness in enforcement."As you know, we did not reach consensus in the drafting team as to the meaning of "legitimate" with respect to Question (3).I also note (as raised in our small team work) that the Board adopted the Accountability Workstream 2 Final Report setting out the ICANN Human Rights - Framework of Interpretation (HR-FOI within ICANN. This is mentioned and linked here for information since all Councilors may not be aware of this governing document:Thank you,Anne_______________________________________________On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 8:51 AM jen--- via council <council@icann.org> wrote:_______________________________________________Dear All,
Please note that the Charter linked to the Motion is now in final form. Many thanks to the Charter drafting small team for their work and constructive efforts to get us here.
Key changes from the previous version include:
- A rewording of q5 to focus on remedies and avoid duplication of language
- A swap in some of the text in the description of Members and Participants criteria for logic flow
The friendly amendment to the Motion includes the updated link to this Charter in clause 6, and additional word (“Alternates”) to resolved clause 2 which will now read:
2. The GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Secretariat publish the Call for Volunteers for Members, Participants, Alternates, Observers, and relevant liaisons per the membership structure within the PDP WG charter.
Best,
Jen
From: jen@dot.asia <jen@dot.asia>
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2025 7:35 PM
To: 'council@icann.org' <council@icann.org>
Subject: Motion – DNS Abuse PDP1 Charter
Dear All,
Please find attached the Motion for the DNS Abuse PDP1 Charter.
Please note that the Charter Drafting small team is currently resolving editorial comments on the charter, and the current linked charter represents the clean version received by the 23:59 UTC deadline today. When this gets resolved, this will be updated in the link in the motion as well.
Wishing all a restful holiday season.
Best,
Jen
council mailing list -- council@icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
council mailing list -- council@icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.