Personally, I agree with Niels that if
ICANN.org decides by a vote of the Board of Directors to use Ruggie as an assessment tool and then presents those results to the SOs and ACs for further consideration in the policy development processes, that is fine. Don’t
know whether the cost of such an assessment would create a budgetary issue. I also think we should be careful not to create possible liability or evidence that would be used to support action against the ICANN Board/organization.
|
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese |
|
Of Counsel |
|
520.629.4428 office |
|
520.879.4725 fax |
|
_____________________________ |
|
<image001.png> |
|
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP |
|
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 |
|
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 |
From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 1:01 PM
To: ws2-hr@icann.org
Subject: Redline and also excerpt from Considerations re
ICANN.org reviewing framework with SOs and ACs
In the Considerations document, we also have language which tries to protect the role of SOs and ACs as follows:
“When developing corporate or operational
policies, and executing its operations, ICANN the organization should take the Human Rights Core Value into account. In order to do so ICANN the organization should propose a framework to the community, which should include multistakeholder involvement in
its development, and regular review.”
|
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese |
|
Of Counsel |
|
520.629.4428 office |
|
520.879.4725 fax |
|
_____________________________ |
|
<image004.png> |
|
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP |
|
One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 |
|
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 |
<image005.png>