OFAC Recommendation and other interference in ICANN's core activities
Dear all, I find the present proposal a well-written document and a good compromise. Some reflections from the point of view of international law: It is important that Internet is a neutral global resource, not subject to general sanctions by U.S., other countries or the Security Council of the UN. Here, we are moving to a “global common”. However, ICANN does not seek for licenses in individual sanctions (SDN list, such lists exist also in other countries). This means an option (hopefully not used) for territorial jurisdictions to interfere with ICANN’s core activities. The SDN list of today has 1054 pages. Compliance is secured by obligations of the financial sector concerning money laundering and terrorist fighting (FATF Recommendations) that require a search in related commercial watch list vendors with additional information (e.g. Thomson Reuters Accelus/World-Check or Reed Elsevier/Bankers Accuity, Dow Jones). Any banking transaction - very important in the domain name business – becomes nearly impossible. Jurisdiction principles decide about the most appropriate forum. For individual sanctions, states with its legal systems and due process of law seem to be a much better forum that ICANN. In most cases, international law will support the sanctions and ICANN would only have an additional burden in assessing “illegal” individual sanctions, e.g. not allowed under international law. Thus, ICANN should accept the principle of territoriality but other jurisdictions have no obligation to recognise these sanctions. This applies also for registries and registrars. The caused problems for individuals are not new (e.g. Cadi case). Pragmatic solutions may not exist but are part of the weaknesses of the international system. I propose an additional remedy: It would be helpful if ICANN provides support in such cases of “illegal sanctions” against individuals if they occur, e.g. supporting on a case-by-case basis individuals fighting in national legal systems against such measures. Best regards, Erich P.S. Thanks, Thomas. Very interesting. It will be a never ending job to avoid interference in ICANN’s core activities. Von: Thomas Rickert Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. September 2017 10:58 An: ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org Betreff: [Ws2-jurisdiction] .cat Hi all,you might find this article interesting.https://www.internetnews.me/2017/09/20/dotcat-registry-offices-raided-spanis...
Dear Eric I raised an issue which has nothing to do with UN Pls carefully read the text and kindly do not politicize the matter A NON US NATIONAL in Netherlands refrain to deal with a non Iranian based national with Iranian passport requesting domain name. What is the the UN relation on this matter . It is purely an ICANN issue Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 20 Sep 2017, at 14:03, Schweighofer Erich <erich.schweighofer@univie.ac.at> wrote:
Dear all,
I find the present proposal a well-written document and a good compromise. Some reflections from the point of view of international law:
It is important that Internet is a neutral global resource, not subject to general sanctions by U.S., other countries or the Security Council of the UN. Here, we are moving to a “global common”.
However, ICANN does not seek for licenses in individual sanctions (SDN list, such lists exist also in other countries). This means an option (hopefully not used) for territorial jurisdictions to interfere with ICANN’s core activities. The SDN list of today has 1054 pages. Compliance is secured by obligations of the financial sector concerning money laundering and terrorist fighting (FATF Recommendations) that require a search in related commercial watch list vendors with additional information (e.g. Thomson Reuters Accelus/World-Check or Reed Elsevier/Bankers Accuity, Dow Jones). Any banking transaction - very important in the domain name business – becomes nearly impossible.
Jurisdiction principles decide about the most appropriate forum. For individual sanctions, states with its legal systems and due process of law seem to be a much better forum that ICANN. In most cases, international law will support the sanctions and ICANN would only have an additional burden in assessing “illegal” individual sanctions, e.g. not allowed under international law. Thus, ICANN should accept the principle of territoriality but other jurisdictions have no obligation to recognise these sanctions. This applies also for registries and registrars. The caused problems for individuals are not new (e.g. Cadi case). Pragmatic solutions may not exist but are part of the weaknesses of the international system.
I propose an additional remedy: It would be helpful if ICANN provides support in such cases of “illegal sanctions” against individuals if they occur, e.g. supporting on a case-by-case basis individuals fighting in national legal systems against such measures.
Best regards, Erich
P.S. Thanks, Thomas. Very interesting. It will be a never ending job to avoid interference in ICANN’s core activities.
Von: Thomas Rickert Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. September 2017 10:58 An: ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org Betreff: [Ws2-jurisdiction] .cat
Hi all,you might find this article interesting.https://www.internetnews.me/2017/09/20/dotcat-registry-offices-raided-spanis... _______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
participants (2)
-
Arasteh -
Schweighofer Erich