Dear Niels

I note the SSAC report.   I worry again that its recommendation language calling for a Human Rights Impact Assessment,

Microsoft Word - SAC0XX_SSAC_Input_to_CCWG-Acc_WS2_Human_Rights_v1.1-CLEAN.docx

"A Human Rights Impact Assessment4 is a process for systematically identifying, predicting and responding to the potential human rights impacts of business operations, policies, or agreements."

has the possible consequence of inadvertantly trying to impose human rights tests on agreements in the IANA function, especially as they may apply to agreements (written or explicit) with ccTLD operators.   As I have said consistently in this process, this could be extremely damaging on the operations and global acceptance of the IANA function.   Hence my concern about certain sections of the Ruggie Principles being applied to ICANN - ICANN does not have the luxury of choosing which parts of the world it may or may not serve. 

First and foremost, the first right of humans we need to protect is having access to an Internet that is global and operates 7x24.

Best

Paul




On 3/13/17 9:12 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
Dear all,

Please find attached the letter we received from SSAC.

All the best,

Niels


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Input from SSAC to the WG on Human Rights
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 03:12:11 +0100
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@netnod.se>
To: Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org>
CC: SSAC <ssac@icann.org>, Human Rights <cc-humanrights@icann.org>

Niels,

As chair of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee, one of the
chartering organizations of the CCWG on Accountability, we would like to
submit the attached comments as fruit for thought for the discussions.

Best,

   Patrik Fältström
   Chair of the SSAC




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


-- 
Dr Paul Twomey
Managing Director
Argo P@cific 

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

www.argopacific.com