Dear All, Just a reminder, the next steps are as follows: * CCOICI to review proposed HR impact language (deliberations plus recommendations) for inclusion in CCOICI WS2 report by Wednesday 19 October: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit . To facilitate your review, we’ve gone ahead and accepted all the redline changes. You will just see in redline the additions we’ve made to reflect that any updates are not limited to PDP materials but any materials used for GNSO policy processes. * Staff support team to include HR impact language into CCOICI WS2 recommendations report by 20 October. * CCOICI to review updated WS2 recommendations report by 2 November. * Next CCOICI meeting scheduled for 2 November to resolve any outstanding items. * Finalize WS2 recommendations report and submit to the GNSO Council by the document deadline (7 November) for the November GNSO Council meeting (17 November). Best regards, Ariel, Julie and Marika From: GNSO-CCOICI <gnso-ccoici-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, 5 October 2022 at 14:51 To: "gnso-ccoici@icann.org" <gnso-ccoici@icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-CCOICI] Notes and AIs from CCOICI meeting on Wednesday 05 October at 12.00 UTC Dear CCOICI members, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s CCOICI meeting. Please see the relevant materials which can be found on the wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/DRR1Cw. Best regards, Ariel, Julie and Marika CCOICI Meeting #28 on Wednesday 05 October at 12.00 UTC HOMEWORK/ACTION ITEMS: 1. Manju Chen to share the deliberations and draft recommendations at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit__;!!PtGJab4!9g-QGMbI0xDdo30p1clQGHME1eATir4cVDFFU5SPOPWFyhVWBgCYQ2adcn-nohNI-JmCZNDMQtWdMpZqgBQPQm_-GM-93Pcvog$> with Bruna Martins dos Santos. 2. Staff to review the document to see if the language needs to be expanded to include other policy processes, such as GGP or EPDP. 3. The CCOICI to review the document at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit__;!!PtGJab4!9g-QGMbI0xDdo30p1clQGHME1eATir4cVDFFU5SPOPWFyhVWBgCYQ2adcn-nohNI-JmCZNDMQtWdMpZqgBQPQm_-GM-93Pcvog$> and provide comments or suggestions if any by Wednesday, 19 October. 4. Staff to incorporate the final text into the draft report to Council for the CCOICI to review and comment by Wednesday, 02 November. 5. Staff to schedule a placeholder meeting for Wednesday, 02 November. Notes: 1. Welcome 2. Recap from ICANN75 informal meeting with Ephraim Percy Kenyanito (see high level notes below) * Interesting meeting; can continue to work with them. * Helpful conversation and tried to incorporate some of his guidance into the draft document. * What the Group is doing aligns with his thinking. * Really helpful that he provided the type of questions you would need to raise – if the answers to the questions are yes, you may still be able to proceed but you would have shown due diligence. * Ephraim is working on an ICANN Learn course that might be an additional tool for groups to use – another piece of supporting work. 3. Review of updated deliberations & draft recommendations (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit__;!!PtGJab4!7IlTZNTCKO7lNf-9DsoBPn9m-_OSNaeBwkOqrKeGTdJArmt2rWVT5vlVEsWMM8WCFSVD2TgT_Gg9FETXPOpHdk8zVcB9eLjdeOI$>) a. Consider CCOICI input * New language added based on the guidance received from Ephraim. * Putting it in a format that could be included in a report to the Council. * Suggest updating the different work products with checklists on HR impact – prepare the way in case a more detailed assessment is needed. * Also needs to ensure that a HR assessment is part of the chartering of a group. * If the Council would agree with this the approach staff would suggest updates to existing templates for the Council to consider also in coordination with Emphraim. * It might be helpful to have Bruna review the document, although it will go to Council in general to review. * Question: Will we provide the checklist to the Council for approval, or develop it afterward? Answer: We have given some examples in the document/report, but will develop the full checklist as part of implementation after approval by the Council. Although if the group prefers we can develop the checklist as part of the report to Council. * Maybe make an edit to expand the document to include all policy development processes – to include GGP and EPDP. But we don’t have templates for those processes, but we could use the same template as for the PDP. Though the current language should cover other processes. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Manju Chen to share the deliberations and draft recommendations at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit__;!!PtGJab4!9g-QGMbI0xDdo30p1clQGHME1eATir4cVDFFU5SPOPWFyhVWBgCYQ2adcn-nohNI-JmCZNDMQtWdMpZqgBQPQm_-GM-93Pcvog$> with Bruna Martins dos Santos. 2. Staff to review the document to see if the language needs to be expanded to include other policy processes, such as GGP or EPDP. b. Confirm next steps * Helpful to get feedback on how much time the group needs to review the deliberations and draft recommendations. * Group will review via email and decide whether or not to have a meeting – review by 19 October to flag any issues. Then staff will incorporate the language into the full report that has already been circulated and allow another two weeks to review, with the goal to have it ready for the Council to review at its November meeting. Consider whether to schedule a place-holder meeting for November. ACTION ITEMS: 1. The CCOICI to review the document at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1LvO8ktYDDoUMfMUNzp1JUQyfheer-6sy/edit__;!!PtGJab4!9g-QGMbI0xDdo30p1clQGHME1eATir4cVDFFU5SPOPWFyhVWBgCYQ2adcn-nohNI-JmCZNDMQtWdMpZqgBQPQm_-GM-93Pcvog$> and provide comments or suggestions if any by Wednesday, 19 October. 2. Staff to incorporate the final text into the draft report to Council for the CCOICI to review and comment by Wednesday, 02 November. 4. Confirm next steps & next meeting (TBC) * Group to review the document on the list. * Staff to work with Olga to consider a placeholder meeting for the regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, 02 November. ACTION ITEM: Staff to schedule a placeholder meeting for Wednesday, 02 November. ----------- High level notes – informal meeting of available CCOICI members with Ephraim Percy Kenyanito Monday 19 September Introduction * A high level overview was provided of the deliberations of the CCOICI to date and how the committee is considering if/how to ensure that consideration is given to the potential impact on human rights of a policy issue and/or recommendations throughout the different stages of policy development including the Issue Report, Initial Report and Final Report. It was noted that the CCOICI is considering a lightweight approach that allows for escalation and further assessment, when deemed necessary. * It was noted that the question was raised whether a type of checklist could help with factoring in the consideration of the impact on human rights at the different stages and that some members of the committee had suggested reaching out to Ephraim to request his input factoring in his expertise in this topic. Discussion * Ephraim shared some of his experience in this area and work he and his organization (Art 19) have undertaken for different companies and organizations. * He agreed that it should be possible to come up with a number of lightweight questions that could help guide the consideration of the impact of human rights throughout the PDP such as: 1) Is there a likely human rights impact, 2) who are the groups expected to be impacted, 3) what is the expected severity of the impact (high/medium/low). Consideration should also be given whether or not any ICANN Bylaws are expected to be impacted (such as, for example, diversity). It was noted that some guidance and/or examples for how to respond to these questions would be helpful. * Should these lightweight questions point to a likely impact on human rights, this does not imply that work cannot continue or that major changes need to be made, but it should trigger further evaluation through questions such as: 1) is it necessary, 2) is it proportionate, 3) is it legitimate. * He explained that unlike a data protection impact assessment, which is a type of audit, a human rights impact assessment requires engagement and discussion with impacted parties which may take more time. For example, the HRIA on the SSAD ODA took around 3 months to complete. Such an assessment is typically done through a number of questions (see for example, the HRIA on the SSAD ODA which was shared previously:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WRHPWPtaK8Xc2IXtfA3MVOcprHsVVA9M6J8e... [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WRHPWPtaK8Xc2IXtfA3MVOcprHsVVA9M6J8eUQH5UyA/edit*gid=8463347__;Iw!!PtGJab4!9KCVKzak00GSR6UBiQHFc_NDGH--ECLvlqN3TZO_CUhBEsIp_l2qxuHL96KITcboHd7Kay1RcCea6RBAHJTbtBpIpStdhYKDhss$>) * Ephraim also noted that he is working on an ICANN Learn course on Human Rights. It was noted that this could serve as a learning tool for both staff as well as community members involved in a PDP and who are expected to address questions in relation to the possible impact on human rights. * It was also noted that even though staff members and/or PDP WG members may not be experts in the area of human rights, there are also opportunities for the community, including groups like the CCWP-HR to weigh in on the question of the impact on human rights through the different opportunities for community input such as public comment. * It was noted that at this stage the CCOICI would be expected to recommend to the Council how to approach this issue, but that implementation would happen after Council review of the proposed approach and as part of the implementation further consultation with experts such as Ephraim could be undertaken. * It was also suggested that it might be of interest to brief the Council on the work that Ephraim and others have done in this area as it relates to ICANN as it may help facilitate understanding of this topic. It was suggested that this could potentially be done in the form of a webinar, with further Council discussion to planned (for example, as part of the SPS).