(sent a reply list unfortunately and it went to the wrong list) Hi, I do not see the problem with including a statement such as this. Perhaps I would indicate that it was a not for profit business instead of a business and would insert an "as appropriate" after "as a useful guide". But I think mentioning this among the international instruments is a good idea. avri On 28-Sep-17 08:21, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:

Dear all,

 

Further to my Email below, I would like to share with you the following proposal that would constitute in my view an acceptable outcome of the public consultation on the Framework of Interpretation, and build on the wording proposals made by Switzerland in its public comment input (see attached) and the exchanges had thereafter in the Subgroup.

 

Specifically, I would like to propose that the following paragraph on page 6 (under “internationally recognized human rights”) be reworded as follows (changes in red):

 

“/By committing to one or more of these international instruments, nation states are expected to embed human rights in their national legislation*. */

*/The UN Guiding Principles on Businesses and Human Rights are relevant for business organizations. Insofar ICANN the Organization is concerned, it should consider, as a business, the UN Guiding Principles on Businesses and Human Rights as a useful guide when applying the Human Rights Core Value./**“*

 

The UN Guiding Principles on Businesses and Human Rights (UNGP) are the universally accepted voluntary standard for business organizations. Therefore, we feel that it should be mentioned under the instruments regarding “internationally recognized human rights”. In order to avoid any extension of the UNGP to the non-business elements of ICANN (SO/ACs) there is specific mention that the UNGP would be relevant only for ICANN the Organization. In addition, the mention is constrained to having to “consider” the UNGP “as a useful guide” – which, in our view, eliminates any perceived danger of creating any obligation whatsoever through this mention.

 

I hope that this compromise proposal may be positively considered by all of you. Please note that it is made only by me with the aim of arriving at a common ground and that it has not been possible to coordinate due to time constraints with the other participants joining the dissent.

 

Best regards

 

Jorge

 

 

*Von:*accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch *Gesendet:* Montag, 25. September 2017 15:34 *An:* turcotte.bernard@gmail.com; accountability-cross-community@icann.org *Betreff:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2 - 27-28 September Plenary Agenda and Materials - 1 of 2

 

Dear all,

 

Regarding *agenda point 8* and specifically the *dissenting opinion* attached to the Report from the Subgroup dealing with the Framework of Interpretation (FOI) of the Human Rights Core Value (see p. 2 of the attached document), which I have filed together with a number of colleagues, I would like to share some thoughts and a suggested path forward with the CCWG Plenary before the calls scheduled to discuss this.

 

The main point of the dissent is, in my view, that we feel that the public comment period showed the existence of two schools of thought: some that favored maintaining the text sent to public comment “as is” (ALAC to a certain extent, and a number of different GNSO constituencies) and those (UK, BRZ, and CH) proposing some steps forward, especially in the recognition of the UN Guiding Principles (Ruggie Principles).

 

However, again in our view, the discussions in the Subgroup did not yield a properly balanced result, which would have reflected at least some if not all of the positions and proposals made by the named Governments. This relates in particular, _that the FOI text should make stronger reference to the UN Guiding Principles as the most relevant voluntary international standard_. In our view, the Subgroup did not undertake an inclusive enough effort to determine if a compromise text could be formulated that would accommodate this position of the three governments.

 

Therefore, I would like to _suggest that the CCWG Plenary could decide that some additional efforts to reaching a broader consensus on this important issue should be made_ – a broader consensus that could be more inclusive of all views expressed during the public comment period.

 

Hence, I would _suggest that the CCWG decides that the Report together with the dissent are sent back to the Subgroup with the request that a broader consensus solution is quickly sought within the coming e.g. 2 weeks after the Plenary call_.

 

I hope this way to proceed may seem reasonable to you and obtain your support during the abovementioned call. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have and look forward to your feedback.

 

For my part I’ll try hard to attend the Wednesday call, but I’m (physically) attending at the same time /the UN CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation/. Hence, I would be very thankful if this issue could be discussed on the Thursday call instead if possible.

 

Kind regards

 

Jorge

 

 

*Von:*accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Bernard Turcotte *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 21. September 2017 18:05 *An:* Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> *Betreff:* [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2 - 27-28 September Plenary Agenda and Materials - 1 of 2

 

All,

 

Please fins below and attached the agenda for the 27-28 September plenary.

 

As noted in an earlier email the Co-Chairs do not believe the plenary can get through all of these materials in a single two hour session and that it is imperative we do so this week given the timing constraints we are working under. As such an additional 2 hour plenary session has been added 28 September 1900 UTC (the original plenary meeting scheduled for 27 September 1300 UTC still stands).

 

Also please note that given the large volume of documents we will be including these in two separate emails to avoid size limit issues for participants.

 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or problems with the documents.

 

 

Bernard Turcotte

ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2

 

*Agenda for the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 Plenary of 27 and 28 September*

* *

1.     Introduction, update to SOIs, reminder on standards of behavior

2.     Review of Agenda

3.     Administration

3.1.Review timeline.

3.2.Reminder of 27 October face to face in Abu Dhabi.

3.3.Reminder of High Interest sessions in Abu Dhabi

4.     Legal Committee Update

4.1.​         Question sent to ICANN Legal on Ombudsman recommendation 8 regarding the independence of the proposed Ombuds Advisory Panel (questions sent directly to ICANN legal on approval of Co-chairs).

4.2.Transparency – at the 13 September meeting of the sub-group updated language for recommendations 2, 15 and 16 were considered. ICANN Legal advised that they would consider these and provide written feedback to the sub-group.

5.     Point on Quorum (held over from last plenary)

6.     Second Reading of the draft recommendations of the Diversity sub-group.

o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Diversity-DrafRecommendations-20170927 (attached - same document as distributed to the 30 August plenary)

7.     First reading of the final recommendations of the SOAC Accountability sub-group.

o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-FinalReport-20170927 (attached) o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-FinalReport-RedLine-20170927 (attached) o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-SOACAcct-AnalysisandResponsetoPublicComments-20170927 (attached)

8.     First reading of the final recommendations of the Human Rights sub-group.

o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-HumanRight-FinalReportWithAdditions-20170927 (attached) o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-HumanRights-PublicConsultation-May2017-Responses (attached)

9.     First reading of the draft recommendation of the Ombuds sub-group (please note that the final report of the external review is provided as a separate file due to size issues)

o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-DrafRecommendations-20170927 (attached in second email) o CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-ExternalReview-Final (attached in second email)

10.First reading of the draft recommendation of the Staff Accountability sub-group.

o CCWG-Accountability-StaffAcct-DraftReport-20170927V1.6 (attached in second email) o CCWG-Accountability-StaffAcct-DraftReport-TrnasmissionLetter-20170927 (attached in second email)

11.AOB

12.​Next Plenaries

12.1.               Thursday 28 September 19:00UTC​

12.2.               Wednesday 4 October 0500 UTC (optional but please schedule)

12.3.               Wednesday 11 October 1300 UTC (optional but please schedule)

12.4.               Wednesday 18 October 1900UTC

13.Adjournment

 

 

 

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community