<html>
<body>
Tijani, at this point, you are the only person who is asking for this
(later supported by Vanda). Are there others that . If there are others,
please speak up.<br><br>
My personal position has been I did not want to see specific language in
the Bylaws without a careful analysis of what it would imply and how, if
any, ICANN would be impacted (as you alluded to in your last paragraph).
The current wording meetings that target, other than the absolute
commitment to the 1 year deadline.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
At 14/12/2015 03:39 AM, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""><font color="#002E7A">
Alan,</font><br>
<font color="#002E7A"><br>
I support your draft, and would like to add more about the Human Rights
issue.<br><br>
As you said the international law and conventions are only binding for
governments who signed them. That’s why any other body that wants to
comply to them should include them in its bylaw as ICANN do by including
in its bylaws as core value of the incorporation that it must carry out
its activities in accordance with applicable law and international law
and conventions. What is the need of repeating in the bylaws the
commitment to respect internationally recognized human rights? Are they
not part of the applicable international law and conventions?<br><br>
Also, the CCWG legal advice told that upon termination of the NTIA
Contract, there would be no significant impact on ICANN’s Human Rights
obligations. So why this is needed?<br><br>
It is even more strange that despite the legal advice and the provision
in the core values that ICANN </font>must carry out its activities in
accordance with applicable law and international law and conventions that
include human rights, the proposal suggest to add an interim bylaw about
human rights, knowing that the final language about the human rights
issue will be worked out in work stream 2.<br><br>
<font color="#002E7A">My strong fear is that they want to regulate the
content though this heavy insistence in putting more and more to
intimidate us; you may see in the futur delegation of TLDs prevented
because the applicant "doesn’t respect human rights" in the
content carried by the TLD……. <br>
</font><br>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<b>Tijani BEN JEMAA<br>
</b>Executive Director<br>
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (<b>FMAI</b>)<br>
Phone: +216 98 330 114<br>
+216 52 385
114<br>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Le 14 déc. 2015 à 07:19,
Alan Greenberg
<<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>
> a écrit :<br><br>
The IANA Issues WG met on Friday to discuss possible issue on the
CCWG-Accountability 3rd draft proposal. <br><br>
The CCWG documents can be founds at
<a href="https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56145016" eudora="autourl">
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56145016</a>.<br>
<br>
The document discussed at the IANA-Issues meeting can be found linked to
the Agenda Item 3 of
<a href="https://community.icann.org/x/PIdlAw" eudora="autourl">
https://community.icann.org/x/PIdlAw</a> (entitled <b>Review of Proposal
and Potential ALAC Positions</b>).<br><br>
We need to send a summary of our comments to the CCWG today (in time for
a CCWG meeting on Tuesday at 06:00 UTC). The attached document summarizes
the issues as modified by the discussion during the
teleconference.<br><br>
Please send any comments in sufficient time for me to integrate them (as
appropriate) into the documents. In particular, is there anything here
that is counter to the tone or detail of the discussion?<br><br>
The Final Public Comment must be submitted no later than 21 December. It
will no doubt closely follow the attached document, but may well include
other issues that come to light over the next days.<br><br>
As ALL ALAC member will be asked to vote on the Public Comments and will
ultimately have to decide whether to ratify the CCWG Proposal, this is
both important and time-sensitive.<br><br>
To the extent that is possible and you feel appropriate, please involve
your RALOs.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
<Draft-ALAC-Issues-13Dec2015.pdf>_______________________________________________<br>
ALAC mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org">
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac" eudora="autourl">
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a><br><br>
At-Large Online:
<a href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a><br>
ALAC Working Wiki:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC" eudora="autourl">
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC</a>
)</blockquote></blockquote></body>
</html>