For the avoidance of doubt, I don't think that Paul and I are on the same page. But that notwithstanding, I pretty much concur with Erich's comment. On 19/10/16 23:32, Schweighofer Erich wrote:
I agree with this analysis of Paul McGrady and Nigel Roberts. ICANN has to respect laws in the countries it is operating. Human rights standards differ and it is not the obligation of ICANN to enforce these. This is the role of human rights bodies. BUT: ICANN is operating also at the international level (as some sui generis organisation) and as such it has accepted to respect international human rights law (e.g. the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the human right conventions, without any reservations, with a sufficiently strong ratification status, e.g. more than 80 countries etc.). ICANN has also to respect regional human rights law (e.g. European Convention on Human Rights, American Convention on Human Rights) and other instruments like the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI). Thus: ICANN as an organisation respects human rights, maybe also in some ethical version (like the "Ruggie Principles", but I remain sceptical). As long as local jurisdictions respect ICANN's autonomy, it is fine. Otherwise, local jurisdiction superposes ICANN's obligations. ICANN may report to human rights bodies and they have to take on this issue.
Best regards, Erich Schweighofer
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-hr-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Paul McGrady