I have added the following comment to the document:

I had thought we were trying to draft actual bylaws language (as reflected in the CCWG Proposal). This is instead a sort of Board statement of support for Human Rights (variously defined by various members of the WP) and statement of intention that bylaws (and policies) will be developed in future (presumably in WS2. That may be a better approach than amending the bylaws now, but it is certainly a different one. Is that now our plan?

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Paul Twomey <paul.twomey@argopacific.com> wrote:

I agree that is that it should be clear - that is why I think the working through of the policies and bylaws envisaged in the draft language now will be important, but will probably take some time to avoid any unintended consequences. There are two questions: what range or existing statement of human rights should be adopted and then to which parts of ICANN's operations etc do they apply.

On 9/3/15 1:21 AM, Nigel Roberts wrote:

I think I also said earlier that I totally agree that ICANN's obligations in this regard be limited to what it does within its mission.

So we are on the same page there.

I do however insist on knowing WHICH fundamental rights ICANN are signed up to respect.

Hence my suggestion that we be clear that human rights be limited only
to ICANN's own ways of conducting its work within its mission.

_______________________________________________
Wp4 mailing list
Wp4@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4

--
Dr Paul Twomey
Managing Director
Argo P@cific

US Cell: +1 310 279 2366
Aust M: +61 416 238 501

www.argopacific.com

_______________________________________________
Wp4 mailing list
Wp4@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4