[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: =? Windows-1252? Q? Respuesta_a_la_Consulta_a_la_Re? == Windows-1252? Q? Gi = F3n_-_Elecciones_ALAC_!? = From: hcarrascob@gmail.com Dear: Aquesta my answer: The problem arises with respect to the following standard: 8. The LACRALO elect two (2) individuals to serve as representatives to the At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) in terms that have been specified in the ICANN Bylaws. Only ALS those that have been accredited before votacin, podrn vote in the choice. Each accredited ALS tendrderecho to one vote. The selected representatives must be members of different ALS, must have their principal place of residence in different passes the region, and their nationalities must be different. The tendrna representatives in charge of the responsibilities set in the ICANN bylaws. Then, the problem arises interpretation regarding the * expression * principal residence referred to in that provision. The controversial rule has been interpreted in two ways: a. - The one Seala that the fact be studying in Edinburgh, I have primary residence in Chile. b. - The second, which is my interpretation, which I follow Seala tending primary residence (or home), but has a secondary residence, or put another way, I am not resident domiciled in Edinburgh. In my view, this is the correct interpretation of the following arguments: * Interpretation CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENT OR UNDER THE LAWS ICANN * In any system there regulatory jurdico and higher standards of character and other rules of inferior character. Therefore, the rules of lower status in case of conflict with their interpretation, and having more than one sense, be interpreted as the most accordance with the standard of higher rank. The same happens within the set of rules governing acting the ICANN. There is a higher standard character, ie The STATUTES ICANN OR BYLAWS in Anglo-Saxon expression and Alluna series other norms of a lower hierarchy like our OPERATING PRINCIPLES THE LACRALO. In BYLAWS standard exists regarding the issue in paragraph 3 the artculo VI, section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws on the DIRECTORS AND THEIR SELECTION *; CHOICE OF PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT *: 3. By putting into practice their responsibilities to fill Seats 9 15, Supporting Organizations and the Community At-Large debern ensure that the ICANN Board by estcompuesta members that collectively demonstrate geogrfica diversity, cultural, of skills, experience and perspective in applying the criteria stipulated in section 3 of this artculo <http://www.icann.org/es/about/governance/bylaws#VI-3> . In no time two directors elected by a support organization podrn be citizens of the same step of passes located in the same Regin geogrfica. For the purposes of this subsection 3 of artculo VI, section 2 of the ICANN's Bylaws, if sb desempearse candidate in office director keep his citizens in more than one step domiciliase for more than five years in a country in which the candidate had not citizen (home), that candidate can be considered as belonging to any of these countries and should select its Declaration of interest ciudadanao the country of domicile under which want the Organization of support or At-Large Community will consider for the purpose of selection. For the purposes of this subsection 3 of artculo VI, section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws, a person can have only a "home", which estardeterminado by where the applicant has permanent residence and that is where lives. This applies directly to the Community At-Large, and solve the problem just the candidate to choose the home under the that is going to be considered for selection effects. In any case, there is also an element that is standard mentioned in the second case means that the address is related to its permanent residence. Aquesta the subject my permanent residence is in Chile, not Edinburgh is transient. If accepted, the interpretation that takes my principal residence Chile (homeless) will be given the paradox that I may be Candidate BOARD ICANN, NomCom, but shall not be entitled to ALAC Member. Lastly, there is a similar case regarding the choice of Adam Peake (UK National) who was selected for the NomCom in relacina EURALO although living in Japan temporarily. * ARGUMENT OF CHILEAN CIVIL CODE * The Civil code in your article 59 Seala: Article 59. The home is the residence, accompanied, real or presumably, the minimum to stay in it. It has been said about the home that: The legal domicile is related to a particular part of State territory.It can be defined as residence in a part given the State's territory, accompanied, real or presumably, the minimum to stay in it. The elements establishing the legal domicile (which can be equated to the body and nimus of posesin) are two: the residence in a particular part State territory and the minimum to stay in that residence. The minimum can be real or alleged. The first is the one with true and actual existence, the second is deduced from certain facts or circumstances. The two elements, residence and minimum, are necessary to constitute home. The current residence, however long, is not enough for stbNL> to be home alone, because the person can keep the minimum return to the previous residence. The minimum, by sOnly, either is sufficient to constitute domicile does not operate an effective change residence. But just enough to keep the minimum address: if you leave the residence with the intention of returning to it, the lack of stay in place, however long, does not lose home.In ahque be said that the minimum is the principal of elements of the home. (Professor Jose Miguel Orrego, Pgina 15 of his notes on personality attributes) The artculo Seala 64 to turn a presumption of residence: Art 64. On the contrary, it is presumed course of the minimum stay and settle in one place, because l opened in store, pharmacy, factory, shop, inn, school or other establishment durable, for manage it in person to accept the fact that site in a Concejil charge, / _ * or regular employment of those who regularly give long * _ /, and analog inputs for other reasons I have a valid contract with the Catholic University of the North by Therefore, I am qualified in that respect. Even the civil code as follows: Article 65. The legal domicile is not changed by the fact reside individual long elsewhere, voluntarily or forcibly, preserving family and principal place of business in the previous address. As, by judicial decree confined to a particular site, or Likewise banished from outside the Republic, retendrel previous home, while his family store in l and the main place of business. So my home is still Chile, according to sealado. * CHILEAN TAX ARGUMENT. * On this issue, I want to clarify that the rule invoked was not me applies, and that under which the same service Seala Tax Chile in * Ord. No. 1,583, of 29.07.2008 * in its nmeral 3 states: In relationship to the subject in this analysis has pointed Service (Official Letter 3514 of 07.14.2003) the rules applicable to the DETERMINATION of the tax home is set in the code Civil respect the legal domicile, with some peculiarities that arising from the provisions of the Rent Act and the Tax code. According to the Civil code artculo 59 of "the home is the residence, accompanied, actual or presumptive, of the minimum of remaining in it. " In this regard, the said Office N 3.514/2003, Seala that the definition foregoing, it follows that the address estconstituido by copular elements, residence and minimum stay in it. At Therefore, the loss of any two elements should bring with the loss of the home. However, once formed the home, the loss of the residence does not always lead to the home. In this sense, both the Civil code (artculo 65) as the Law on Income Tax (Article 4) to situations in which the loss of the residence does not necessarily involve the home. Indeed, 65 of the code artculo Civil provides that "the home civilian moves by the fact reside in the individual long Moreover, voluntary or forced, keeping your family and principal place of business at the address above. " Two requirements required by this standard copula for the lack of residence does not result in the home: the retention of family and principal place of business at the address above. However, examining the elements that will lead to tax determine the loss of the home According to the provisions of the code Civil and Law on Income Tax, warns that the code Civil serving the premise that the individual does not keep the family and principal place of business in their former home, while that for the purposes of the Income Tax Law is weighted the lack of qualified residence and the fact that the taxpayer does not keep the principal place of business in Chile, without referring to the factor family. It is essential therefore that both take consideracin appropriate regulatory bodies agree as one of the factors decisive determine the loss of domicile in the country, the circumstance where a person exercises activity which gets most of their income and where they are residing their main interests, history ste that as regards the Income Tax Law is an inherent to it, considering the character that serves as the Economic foundation and expressly recognized by providing, as already indicated, that the mere absence or lack of residence in the country is not causally determined by the loss of domicile in Chile about people who leave the country preserving the main source of business in Chile. Therefore, it is estimated that in the event that a taxpayer who has domiciled in Chile, which has no residence in Chile, According to the provisions of No. 8 of 8 of the tax code artculo and, besides, not preserved in Chile the principal seat of their business, has lost his home in Chile. However, my principal place of business is in Chile. I have employment contract in force in Chile, I pay taxes, I have property ally pay the corresponding taxes for them. All this, I can prove it with documents and I can send those who have authority to assess this situation, as containing sensitive data. * Argument PRCTICO * In practical terms, not my candidacy may prevent compliance I like ALAC member. If I can participate in conferences, attending the future ICANN meetings, issue reports, ask the members participate in all activities, I see what the aquo difference being in Chile. Being outside does not stop me talking with users of my country, my companions of association, or make conference calls or other activities that allow me to know and discuss with my fellow citizens on issues that are of major importance in Chile and the LAC region. My home is in Chile, not in the UK. My passport and visa aslo say. My employment contract effective with the Catholic University of North confirmed, among many other materials that may contribute. My stay in the UK is transient. * TRAVEL TO CHILE * I should add that Chile deberviajar constantly because of my investigation. This not cumplircon tendrproblemas and the regulations about me established the University of Edinburgh: The university may authorize me to be out of Edinburgh to 15 months. View: http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/pg/research/howtoapplyandfrequentlyaskedquestions.as... I can even accompany quotation solicitadaa a travel agency A few weeks ago ago to travel to Chile in the coming months. * In conclusion: I have my main residence in Chile and I can be candidate at sealado. * Regards On 09/08/2012 1:00, Maple JosFrancisco escribitbNL> > Estimados,

Les escribo en esta oportunidad para participarlos en una situación que se ha dado en las últimas semanas en LACRALO, referente a la situación de Humberto Carrasco como candidato a miembro de ALAC, teniendo su residencia actual en Edimburgo y el posible conflicto con los principios operativos de LACRALO en la regla numero 8 (Citada mas abajo).

He recibido mail del Staff de ICANN inclusive, consultando esta situación particular, y varios mails de miembros de la región preocupados y con dudas acerca de las elecciones próximas. Y se ha convertido en un tema que merece la discusión y el conocimiento de la región.

Antes de enviar este email, tuve oportunidad de hablar personalmente con Humberto y el comparte la idea de debatir entre todos esta situación.

De todas las consultas y charlas que he tenido arme un resumen de las situaciones y preocupaciones generales y las comparto con ustedes para que puedan opinar.

Saludos

José Arce.-

Presidente de LACRALO

*Lugar de residencia de Humberto Carrasco*

Humberto está viviendo en Edimburgo, Escocia, y está estudiando un Doctorado en la Universidad de Edimburgo. Él mismo ha expresado esta situación cuando envió un correo electrónico a la lista de discusión de LACRALO, aceptando la nominación propuesta como representante de LACRALO ante ALAC.

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-es/2012/004678.html

También existen correos electrónicos en la lista de discusión de LACRALO donde él solicita que lo llamen para una teleconferencia de LACRALO, donde brinda un número telefónico de Escocia para recibir la llamada.

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/2012/005262.html

Además en la página personal de Facebook, donde cada uno de los usuarios brinda los datos que quiere brindar de manera voluntaria, Humberto ha expresado que vive en Edimburgo, Escocia.

https://www.facebook.com/humberto.carrasco.376

<http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/2012/005262.html>También en su perfil personal de Facebook, Humberto ha expresado que comenzó sus estudios en la Universidad de Edimburgo en el año 2011. Como es de público conocimiento, estudiar un Doctorado de la rama que fuere, demanda mucho más que un año de estudio, por lo que se infiere que todavía está viviendo en Edimburgo y estudiando su Doctorado en la Universidad de Edimburgo.

https://www.facebook.com/humberto.carrasco.376/info

*Requisitos de residencia para estudiar un Doctorado en la Universidad de Edimburgo (Escocia)*

En el enlace que se acompaña se detallan los requisitos de residencia para estudiar un Doctorado en Edimburgo en el sector de las telecomunicaciones como el que Humberto está realizando.

http://www.drps.ed.ac.uk/08-09/regulations/postgrad.php

Entre esos requisitos contenidos en el punto 4 se exige que los candidatos a PhD deben mantener su *residencia en Edimburgo* *durante el período de estudio* (en Doctorados tienen un mínimo de 3 años de duración) a menos que una licencia de ausencia haya sido permitida. *Se entiende por residencia en Edimburgo: residencia en la ciudad de Edimburgo o en sus inmediaciones, y proximidad del candidato a Edimburgo, para permitir la facilidad de las reuniones cara a cara con sus supervisores y el estudio, dirigido por el supervisor y aprobado por la Facultad*.

Este documento de la Universidad de Edimburgo también establece la posibilidad de residencia en otro lugar para candidatos a PhD para fines de trabajo de campo e investigaciones académicas siempre que no excedan el plazo de 15 meses, aunque debiendo residir al menos durante 9 meses de la duración de su Doctorado en Edimburgo. Para hacer uso de esta posibilidad los candidatos deberán obtener la autorización por escrito del Director de la Facultad y con la exigencia de mantener un contacto regular con su propio supervisor.

Los permisos para razones distintas a trabajos de campo o investigaciones académicas, serán concedidos de manera excepcional por la Facultad.

*Requisitos para los representantes de LACRALO ante ALAC*

La primera regla a la que debemos acudir es a nuestros Principios Operativos de LACRALO, que tienen contemplada esta situación de manera expresa, taxativa y clara.

En caso de que haya laguna en ese tema en nuestros Principios Operativos, recién ahí se deben recurrir a reglas externas, como las Reglas de Procedimiento de ALAC, y recién luego a los Estatutos de ICANN.

Las Reglas de Procedimiento de ALAC, no tienen nada previsto sobre este tema. Los estatutos de ICANN se refieren a la residencia, pero solo con respecto a los Directores de la Junta y para cumplir con el requisito de la diversidad regional que está contemplada y exigida de manera expresa para poder ser miembros.

*Principios Operativos de LACRALO*

Los Principios Operativos de LACRALO disponen en su principio número 8, primer párrafo referido a los representantes de LACRALO ante ALAC de manera expresa:

“8. La LACRALO elegirá a dos (2) individuos para servir como representantes ante el At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), en los términos que han sido especificados en los estatutos de ICANN. Sólo aquellas ALS que hayan sido acreditadas antes de la votación, podrán votar en la elección. Cada ALS acreditada tendrá derecho a un voto. Los *representantes seleccionados *deben ser miembros de diferentes ALS, *deben tener su lugar de residencia principal en diferentes países de la región*, y sus nacionalidades deben ser distintas. Los representantes tendrán a su cargo las responsabilidades estipuladas en los estatutos del ICANN”.* https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2264378/Principios%2520Oper... *

*Interpretación de los abogados de ICANN*

Sam Eisner writes =>

**STARTS**

The LACRALO may wish to consider how issues of diversity are discussed in the ICANN Bylaws for the purposes of determining domicile/residency:

For purposes of this sub-section 2 of Article VI, Section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws, if any candidate for director maintains citizenship of more than one country, or has been domiciled for more than five years in a country of which the candidate does not maintain citizenship ("Domicile"), that candidate may be deemed to be from either country and must select in his/her Statement of Interest the country of citizenship or Domicile that he/she wants the Nominating Committee to use for Diversity Calculation purposes. For purposes of this sub- section 2 of Article VI, Section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws, a person can only have one "Domicile," which shall be determined by where the candidate has a permanent residence and place of habitation.

There are considerations of issues of citizenship (which don't seem to be at issue with this candidate) and where he lives. The NomCom requirement sets a 5-year window – which could allow for items such as schooling, etc. The LACRALO may wish to consider whether a school's requirement that a matriculant live near the school to further his education equals a requirement that the matriculant no longer maintain any sort of residence elsewhere – and they may wish to discuss this with the candidate before taking a decision on whether the candidacy is viable. Whatever decision is taken, I would recommend getting a full view of the facts from the candidate, and not basing a decision fully on independent internet research.

I don't see in the ALAC ops document that there's any discussion of residency requirements, so I don't see a conflict there.

** ENDS**

En la consulta realizada a los abogados de ICANN, expresan lo expresado arriba. Aunque se olvidan que cuando la situación presentada está contemplada de manera expresa en nuestros estatutos, debemos recurrir en primer lugar, a ellos. Además hacen referencia a las elecciones a cargo del NomCom, que se rigen por reglas diferentes a las de LACRALO.

En este caso, estamos buscando elegir por la región, a un representante de LACRALO ante ALAC. Se tienen que aplicar las reglas que rigen en nuestra región, no las del NomCom. Las del NomCom se aplicarán cuando se elijan candidatos a su cargo, que no es nuestro caso.

Aplicar reglas de extraña jurisdicción afectan la *independencia y autonomía que debe tener un RALO: la posibilidad de dictar por sus propios estatutos y regirse por ellos*.

* *

*¿Cómo se debe interpretar el requisito de la residencia?*

Legalmente, la residencia implica dos elementos: el *corpus *y el *animus*. Es decir, encontrarse físicamente en un lugar (con el cuerpo de la persona en dicho lugar, viviendo en determinado lugar) y además dicha persona debe tener la intención, el *animus*, de permanecer allí.

En la documentación acompañada queda demostrado que Humberto Carrasco, vive, reside, tiene su *corpus* en Edimburgo y además que tiene la intención (el *animus*) de permanecer allí, debido a que aún se encuentra estudiando su Doctorado y para finalizarlo deberá continuar viviendo en Edimburgo, tal como se lo exigen los reglamentos de residencia para los Doctorados de la Universidad de Edimburgo.

Además es propio y de la naturaleza de la residencia, que una persona no puede tener dos o más residencia, en distintos lugares y al mismo tiempo, debido principalmente a que una persona sólo dispone de un cuerpo. Es decir, en nuestro caso, Humberto no puede tener su residencia, vivir, en Edimburgo y en Chile, al mismo tiempo.

También vienen en ayuda para determinar la residencia de las personas, generalmente, las legislaciones en materia tributaria de cada país. Porque se entiende como regla general, que todos los ciudadanos tributan en el país en el que viven o tienen su residencia principal. Salvo excepciones, en las que una persona aún viviendo en un determinado país, deberá tributar en otro país, si en el segundo tiene fuente de ingresos.

Si se sostiene que Humberto tiene residencia en Chile, recurrimos a la legislación tributaria de dicho país, especialmente la referida al Impuesto sobre las Rentas provenientes de bienes situados en Chile o de actividades desarrolladas en él, es decir, de fuente chilena.

Para la legislación chilena se entiende entonces por residencia, a los fines tributarios a:

*"Residente", toda persona natural que permanezca en Chile más de seis meses en un año calendario, o más de seis meses en total, dentro de dos años tributarios consecutivos, *

Por lo tanto, debemos preguntarnos, partiendo de que una persona no puede tener dos residencias diferentes y al mismo tiempo, si ser residente en Chile implica estar más de seis meses en el país, y por otro lado, los reglamentos de residencia de la Universidad de Edimburgo, le exigen a Humberto residir en Edimburgo o sus inmediaciones durante el plazo de sus estudios, ¿cómo podría residir al mismo tiempo en Chile y en Edimburgo?

* *

*El quid a discutir es (desde mi punto de vista):*

Se incumple el requisito de la residencia que establecen los Principios Operativos de LACRALO *“tener su lugar de residencia principal en diferentes países de la región” por tener Humberto Carrasco actualmente su residencia en Edimburgo?*

Espero que podamos debatir este tema para hacer transparentes nuestros procesos. _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-es mailing list lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es

http://www.lacralo.org

[[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/0721a506b9.html --]]