Sub-group Members:
Staff:
Apologies: Paul McGrady, Nigel Roberts, Rudi Daniel
** If your name is missing from attendance or apology, please send note to acct-staff@icann.org **
Transcript
- Word Doc
Recording
The Adobe Connect recording is available here:
The audio recording is available here:
Agenda
1. Administrivia Roll call, absentees, SoIs, etc
2. Analysis of Ruggie Principles for ICANN - discussion on UN Guiding Principles 19, 17, 18
3. AOB
Notes
Documents Presented
Chat Transcript
Greg Shatan: I don
Greg Shatan: I think this is our job, not Jurisdiction. We can
Greg Shatan: not hand it off.
Erich Schweighofer: Applicable law changes, not the term.
Tatiana Tropina: I agree with David...
jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): on "applicable law": why don't we start with an interpretation from ICANN legal? what it means to them?
David McAuley (RySG): I will take a stab at it, Jorge, but if ICANN legal would do that then in my view that would be preferable
matthew shears: I understand applicable law is the law that ICANN has to comply with in the jurisdicitons in which it operates - and in terms of what we are concrned about laws that may or may not have spefici or generic human rights opbligations
Anne Aikman-Scalese: Karen forwarded a letter written in 2015 that discussed "applicable law" and summarized U.S. civil rights law. The letter said that even after expiration of the IANA contract, many of these civil rights law still apply.
David McAuley (RySG): One problem we face, IMO, is the language used in these principles is not directly applicable to ICANN
Harold Arcos: my apologies, I will keep only connected through cellphone
Kavouss Arasteh 2: Tatiana, we are not discussing due Diligent under principle 19
matthew shears: this is implementaiton - something our FoI could point to as possible next steps, perhaps
David McAuley (RySG): Agree w Tatiana - mitigate sounds like enforcement
Niels ten Oever: In previous calls we mentioned mitigated as a synonym to 'address'
matthew shears: mitigate is to lessen which requires an action to do so
matthew shears: the prevention and mitigation comes as a result of the impact assesments
Niels ten Oever: How would mitigate not be part of respect?
Tatiana Tropina: Due dilligence comes from other principles which do require due dilligenc
David McAuley (RySG): Tatiana's concern is legit, IMO, as the principle is broad and capable of wide interpretation but the bylaw is quite narrow
Anne Aikman-Scalese: I just forwarded the "applicable law" letter from ICANN Legal to the list again. It is only a starting point and you have to skip the part about the obligations ICANN had as a US federal contractor and go to the last page.
Tatiana Tropina: I just want to say that this principle has to be read together with others. It's not a standing alone principle.
David McAuley (RySG): Mitigate would be acceptable as long as required by applicable law
Tatiana Tropina: And if Ruggie require a broad impact assessment ... this is a broad thing.
Tatiana Tropina: David, yes, as well as protect and enforce
matthew shears: @ David - even then it could be outside the scope of the bylaw
Tatiana Tropina: And yes, it is the issue of implementation
Kavouss Arasteh 2: Any time and evry time we discuss an issue somebody says the issue is of implementation nature.
Kavouss Arasteh 2: How we could draw a line between policy principles and implementation principles
Anne Aikman-Scalese: I note that ICANN has not yet made policy has to HR. This is a high level By-Law. Policy will be made in accordance with the existing ICANN processes - including Policy Development.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): I am in line with your thinking Greg / Jorge
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: Timing reminder - 15 minutes to the top of the hour
Greg Shatan: If we are talking about what ICANN is free to do, and not what it
Greg Shatan: is committed to do we are no longer interpreting a bylaw.
matthew shears: could we move on to the other princples in the agenda so that we move on from Ruggie for the next call?
David McAuley (RySG): on mute?
Tatiana Tropina: Matt :)))) move on from Ruggie in 13 min? you are such an optimist.
Greg Shatan: Same comment as 19. This is out of scope for this group.
Tatiana Tropina: Oh uh now it comes to the wonderful DD.
Erich Schweighofer: Agree with Greg.
Tatiana Tropina: +1 Greg
matthew shears: due diligence for ruggie = the process described in 17
Tatiana Tropina: Yes, we do put them in doubt. Because we have the reasons to do so.
matthew shears: + 1 David
Tatiana Tropina: David, thanks a lot. Can't agree more
Greg Shatan: Also, Ruggie is intended to be a full set of guidelines for entities policies and actions. Our job is much more limited than that.
Anne Aikman-Scalese: ICANN will be undertaking policy-making activities with reference to the FOI-HR. Implementation will occur after policy is adopted - in accordance with existing ICANN processes. Agree that human rights impact assessment is implementation. Not sure as to whether conducting due diligence is policy or implementation. It is quite certain that if it affects registry contract obligations, it is policy.
Greg Shatan: I think we are being sloppy in using the term "policy" as if it is interchangeable with interpretation.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Yes I thought that was what we are doing Niels
Anne Aikman-Scalese: Agree with Greg - we are not supposed to be making policy, but developing an FOI for those who will be making policy.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): absolutly Anne
Greg Shatan: Implementing the Bylaw will require policy work, not just "implementation."
matthew shears: I a way Niels this has been a useful exercise for me becuase at the outset it was unclear to me whether Ruggie was in scope and suitable - but now having gone through this I am convinced that they are largely not, and certainly not as a starting point for our limited work on the FoI
Brett Schaefer: +1 Matthew
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): yup
Niels ten Oever: I think our opinions our converging indeed
Niels ten Oever: So now we need to see what we can derive and what we are missing.
Tatiana Tropina: Yes, Matt. Having gone through them I am not convinced to change my position that Ruggie shall be out unless we decide something is in
Anne Aikman-Scalese: As previously expressed, I favor some version of Principle 18 being added to the FOI- HR. I believe this is consistent with current ICANN processes.
David McAuley (RySG): lost Jorge?
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: no sound
Greg Shatan: I think 18 is out of scope for interpreting the bylaw.
Anne Aikman-Scalese: ha ha Niels - funny! ;-
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: 3 minutes left
Brett Schaefer: Yes, consensus seems to be that Ruggie is not a sound basis for the FoI. We should reconsider our approach.
Niels ten Oever: I think that is not what people said Brett, parts of Ruggie are useful, not wholly applicable.
jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland) 2: +1 Niels
Brett Schaefer: Really, I thought people supported Matthew who said: I a way Niels this has been a useful exercise for me becuase at the outset it was unclear to me whether Ruggie was in scope and suitable - but now having gone through this I am convinced that they are largely not, and certainly not as a starting point for our limited work on the FoI.
Anne Aikman-Scalese: I would favor saying that in developing policy, the policy-makers would use 18 a and b when they refer to FOI-HR
jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland) 2: UNGP 18 is important in implementation, so to say a first step, and would help to identify the HR most relevant to ICANN, without cherry-picking...
Anne Aikman-Scalese: Sorry I have to go. THank you! Anne
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): I was thinking we have been 'inspired' by the RP's and that this exercise was well worthwhile
Greg Shatan: I believe I should put my time behind my mouth....
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Thanks everyone Good progress IMO
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Talk again soon
matthew shears: thanks
Tatiana Tropina: thanks! bye all
jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland) 2: thanks and bye!
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: bye all
David McAuley (RySG): Thanks Niels, staff, all