Dear Mr. Niels ten Oever,

Thank you very much for the materials that you have extracted either from WS1 WP4 or from Two CCWG Recommendations.

Some distinguished colleagues quite knowledgeable and qualified wish to reopen the extensive discussions that we have had at WP4 and at CCWG WS1in an attempt to have a new round of discussion on the matter whereas our terms of reference is limited to the parts included in one of the background material that you have provided ,namely

1. to consider which specific Human Rights conventions or other instruments, if any,should be used by ICANN in interpreting and implementing the Human Rights Bylaw.

2.to consider the policies and frameworks, if any, that ICANN needs to develop or enhance in order to fulfill its commitment to respect Human Rights.

3.consistent with ICANN’s existing processes and protocols, consider how these new frameworks should be discussed and drafted to ensure broad multistakeholder involvement in the process.

4-to consider what effect, if any, this Bylaw would have on ICANN’s consideration of advice given by the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC).

5.to consider how, if at all, this Bylaw will affect how ICANN’s operations are carried out.

6.to consider how the interpretation and implementation of this Bylaw will interact with existing and future ICANN policies and procedures”.

It should be emphasized that the Framework of Interpretation is to be developed “to ensure that adding the proposed Human Rights Bylaw provision into the ICANN Bylaws does not lead to an expansion of ICANN’s Mission or scope”

Moreover, it is clearly stated in the Report of CCWG,WS1 that

The proposed draft Bylaw on Human Rights would reaffirm ICANN’s existing obligations within its Core Values, and would clarify ICANN’s commitment to respect Human Rights. We therefore should avoid using other verb such as " Protect" or " enforce" or any other verb instead of " respect" .Similarly ,we do not need to interpret what we mean by to respect as the term respect is a known term and needs not to be described nor to be interpreted In addition, it was emphasized that The bylaw will not expand ICANN’s narrow scope and mission

We should avoid to convert this sub group activities to a Philosophical, Psychological, and research activities. We are neither the UN General

I hope you will lead the group in order that it remains within its limited trams of reference and just answer those questions raised above,

Best Regards.

Arasteh

2016-09-06 0:19 GMT+02:00 Niels ten Oever <lists@nielstenoever.net>:

Dear all,

Please find underneath and attached the proposed agenda for our call of
Sept 6 19:00 UTC.

Also please find attached a rather advanced version of the document
mentioned under agenda point 2, the summary of the Human Rights work
under Workstream 1.

1. Administrivia
Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Discussion on: the Summary on what was agreed and discussed on human
rights during WS1
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rwpw9aSAqboRO2_rNkjMVJPOmYwmdr5B1_M_aNMoZb4/edit?usp=sharing
3. Discussion on: Concerns on possible impacts of Human Rights bylaw and FoI
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KcKGRJjuhKEzCh2AZ8PPR_MofOQFBN8CMuJqTG_h9h4/edit?usp=sharing
4. Discussion on FoI draft document
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1emqmzyB9_0vm6oKxhIWZ47L7lxcFKUBHVnkBYUOsA2Q/edit
5. AOB

ICANN staff informed me that they are working on providing more real
time collaboration methods, but currently they do not offer such
services. So until that time I am afraid we are stuck with Google Docs.

As always feel free to suggest addition or changes to the points above.

Best,

Niels
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9

_______________________________________________
Ws2-hr mailing list
Ws2-hr@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr