[lac-discuss-en] =? Windows-1252? Q? Respuesta_a_la_Consulta_a_la_Re? == Windows-1252? Q? Gi = F3n_-_Elecciones_ALAC_!? =

hcarrascob at gmail.com hcarrascob at gmail.com
Thu Aug 9 17:15:46 UTC 2012


[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

 Subject: =? Windows-1252? Q? Respuesta_a_la_Consulta_a_la_Re? == Windows-1252? Q? Gi = F3n_-_Elecciones_ALAC_!? = 
 From: hcarrascob at gmail.com

 Dear: 


 Aquesta my answer: 


 The problem arises with respect to the following standard: 




 8. 


    The LACRALO elect two (2) individuals to serve as 
    representatives to the At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) in 
    terms that have been specified in the ICANN Bylaws. Only 
    ALS those that have been accredited before votacin, podrn 
    vote in the choice. Each accredited ALS tendrderecho to one vote. 
    The selected representatives must be members of different 
    ALS, must have their principal place of residence in different 
    passes the region, and their nationalities must be different. The 
    tendrna representatives in charge of the responsibilities set 
    in the ICANN bylaws.


 Then, the problem arises interpretation regarding the 
 * expression * principal residence referred to in that provision. 


 The controversial rule has been interpreted in two ways: 


 a. - The one Seala that the fact be studying in Edinburgh, 
 I have primary residence in Chile. 


 b. - The second, which is my interpretation, which I follow Seala 
 tending primary residence (or home), but has a 
 secondary residence, or put another way, I am not resident 
 domiciled in Edinburgh. 


 In my view, this is the correct interpretation of the following 
 arguments: 




 * Interpretation CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENT OR UNDER THE LAWS 
 ICANN * 




 In any system there regulatory jurdico and higher standards of character 
 and other rules of inferior character. Therefore, the rules of 
 lower status in case of conflict with their interpretation, and 
 having more than one sense, be interpreted as the most 
 accordance with the standard of higher rank.


 The same happens within the set of rules governing acting the 
 ICANN. There is a higher standard character, ie The STATUTES 
 ICANN OR BYLAWS in Anglo-Saxon expression and Alluna series 
 other norms of a lower hierarchy like our OPERATING PRINCIPLES 
 THE LACRALO. 


 In BYLAWS standard exists regarding the issue in paragraph 3 
 the artculo VI, section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws on 
 the DIRECTORS AND THEIR SELECTION *; CHOICE OF PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT *: 




 3. By putting into practice their responsibilities to fill Seats 9 
 15, Supporting Organizations and the Community At-Large debern 
 ensure that the ICANN Board by estcompuesta 
 members that collectively demonstrate geogrfica diversity, cultural, 
 of skills, experience and perspective in applying the criteria 
 stipulated in section 3 of this artculo 
<http://www.icann.org/es/about/governance/bylaws#VI-3> . In no 
 time two directors elected by a support organization podrn be 
 citizens of the same step of passes located in the same Regin 
 geogrfica.


 For the purposes of this subsection 3 of artculo VI, section 2 of the 
 ICANN's Bylaws, if sb desempearse candidate in office 
 director keep his citizens in more than one step domiciliase 
 for more than five years in a country in which the candidate had not 
 citizen (home), that candidate can be considered as 
 belonging to any of these countries and should select its 
 Declaration of interest ciudadanao the country of domicile under which 
 want the Organization of support or At-Large Community will consider 
 for the purpose of selection. For the purposes of this subsection 3 of artculo 
 VI, section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws, a person can have only 
 a &quot;home&quot;, which estardeterminado by where the 
 applicant has permanent residence and that is where 
 lives. 




 This applies directly to the Community At-Large, and 
 solve the problem just the candidate to choose the home under the 
 that is going to be considered for selection effects.


 In any case, there is also an element that is standard mentioned in the 
 second case means that the address is related to its 
 permanent residence. 


 Aquesta the subject my permanent residence is in Chile, not 
 Edinburgh is transient. 


 If accepted, the interpretation that takes my principal residence 
 Chile (homeless) will be given the paradox that I may be 
 Candidate BOARD ICANN, NomCom, but shall not be entitled to 
 ALAC Member. 


 Lastly, there is a similar case regarding the choice of Adam Peake 
 (UK National) who was selected for the NomCom in relacina EURALO 
 although living in Japan temporarily. 




 * ARGUMENT OF CHILEAN CIVIL CODE * 




 The Civil code in your article 59 Seala: 


 Article 59. The home is the residence, accompanied, real or 
 presumably, the minimum to stay in it. 


 It has been said about the home that: 


 The legal domicile is related to a particular part of 
 State territory.It can be defined as residence in a part 
 given the State's territory, accompanied, real or 
 presumably, the minimum to stay in it. The elements 
 establishing the legal domicile (which can be equated to the body and 
 nimus of posesin) are two: the residence in a particular part 
 State territory and the minimum to stay in that residence. The 
 minimum can be real or alleged. The first is the one with 
 true and actual existence, the second is deduced from certain 
 facts or circumstances. 


 The two elements, residence and minimum, are necessary to constitute 
 home. The current residence, however long, is not enough for stbNL&gt; to be home alone, because the person can keep the 
 minimum return to the previous residence. The minimum, by sOnly, either 
 is sufficient to constitute domicile does not operate an effective change 
 residence. But just enough to keep the minimum address: if 
 you leave the residence with the intention of returning to it, the lack of 
 stay in place, however long, does not lose 
 home.In ahque be said that the minimum is the principal of 
 elements of the home. (Professor Jose Miguel Orrego, 
 Pgina 15 of his notes on personality attributes) 




 The artculo Seala 64 to turn a presumption of residence: 




 Art 64. On the contrary, it is presumed course of the minimum stay and 
 settle in one place, because l opened in store, pharmacy, 
 factory, shop, inn, school or other establishment durable, for 
 manage it in person to accept the fact that site in a 
 Concejil charge, / _ * or regular employment of those who regularly give 
 long * _ /, and analog inputs for other reasons 




 I have a valid contract with the Catholic University of the North by 
 Therefore, I am qualified in that respect. 


 Even the civil code as follows: 


 Article 65. The legal domicile is not changed by the fact reside 
 individual long elsewhere, voluntarily or forcibly, 
 preserving family and principal place of business in the 
 previous address.


 As, by judicial decree confined to a particular site, or 
 Likewise banished from outside the Republic, retendrel 
 previous home, while his family store in l and the main 
 place of business. 


 So my home is still Chile, according to sealado. 




 * CHILEAN TAX ARGUMENT. * 




 On this issue, I want to clarify that the rule invoked was not me 
 applies, and that under which the same service Seala Tax 
 Chile in * Ord. No. 1,583, of 29.07.2008 * in its nmeral 3 states: 


 In relationship to the subject in this analysis has pointed Service 
 (Official Letter 3514 of 07.14.2003) the rules applicable to the 
 DETERMINATION of the tax home is set in the code 
 Civil respect the legal domicile, with some peculiarities that 
 arising from the provisions of the Rent Act and the 
 Tax code. 




 According to the Civil code artculo 59 of &quot;the home is the 
 residence, accompanied, actual or presumptive, of the minimum of remaining 
 in it. &quot; 




 In this regard, the said Office N 3.514/2003, Seala that the definition 
 foregoing, it follows that the address estconstituido by 
 copular elements, residence and minimum stay in it. At 
 Therefore, the loss of any two elements should bring 
 with the loss of the home. However, once formed the 
 home, the loss of the residence does not always lead to the home. 




 In this sense, both the Civil code (artculo 65) as the Law on 
 Income Tax (Article 4) to situations in which the 
 loss of the residence does not necessarily involve the home. 




 Indeed, 65 of the code artculo Civil provides that &quot;the home 
 civilian moves by the fact reside in the individual long 
 Moreover, voluntary or forced, keeping your family and 
 principal place of business at the address above. &quot; 




 Two requirements required by this standard copula for the lack of 
 residence does not result in the home: the retention of family and 
 principal place of business at the address above.




 However, examining the elements that will lead to tax 
 determine the loss of the home According to the provisions of the code 
 Civil and Law on Income Tax, warns that the code 
 Civil serving the premise that the individual does not keep the family and 
 principal place of business in their former home, while 
 that for the purposes of the Income Tax Law is weighted the lack of 
 qualified residence and the fact that the taxpayer does not keep the 
 principal place of business in Chile, without referring to the factor 
 family. 




 It is essential therefore that both take consideracin 
 appropriate regulatory bodies agree as one of the factors 
 decisive determine the loss of domicile in the country, the 
 circumstance where a person exercises activity which 
 gets most of their income and where they are residing 
 their main interests, history ste that as regards the 
 Income Tax Law is an inherent to it, considering the 
 character that serves as the Economic foundation and expressly 
 recognized by providing, as already indicated, that the mere absence or 
 lack of residence in the country is not causally determined by the loss of 
 domicile in Chile about people who leave the country 
 preserving the main source of business in Chile. 




 Therefore, it is estimated that in the event that a taxpayer who has 
 domiciled in Chile, which has no residence in Chile, 
 According to the provisions of No. 8 of 8 of the tax code artculo 
 and, besides, not preserved in Chile the principal seat of their 
 business, has lost his home in Chile. 




 However, my principal place of business is in Chile. I have 
 employment contract in force in Chile, I pay taxes, I have property 
 ally pay the corresponding taxes for them. 




 All this, I can prove it with documents and 
 I can send those who have authority to assess this situation, as 
 containing sensitive data. 






 * Argument PRCTICO * 






 In practical terms, not my candidacy may prevent compliance 
 I like ALAC member. If I can participate in conferences, attending 
 the future ICANN meetings, issue reports, ask the 
 members participate in all activities, I see what the 
 aquo difference being in Chile. Being outside does not stop me talking 
 with users of my country, my companions of association, or 
 make conference calls or other activities that allow me to know and 
 discuss with my fellow citizens on issues that are of major importance in 
 Chile and the LAC region. 


 My home is in Chile, not in the UK. My passport and visa aslo say.
 My employment contract effective with the Catholic University of North 
 confirmed, among many other materials that may contribute. My 
 stay in the UK is transient. 




 * TRAVEL TO CHILE * 




 I should add that Chile deberviajar constantly because of my 
 investigation. This not cumplircon tendrproblemas and the 
 regulations about me established the University of Edinburgh: 




 The university may authorize me to be out of Edinburgh to 15 months. 




 View: 




 http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/pg/research/howtoapplyandfrequentlyaskedquestions.aspx 




 I can even accompany quotation solicitadaa a travel agency 
 A few weeks ago ago to travel to Chile in the coming months. 




 * In conclusion: I have my main residence in Chile and I can be 
 candidate at sealado. * 




 Regards 




 On 09/08/2012 1:00, Maple JosFrancisco escribitbNL&gt; > Estimados,
>
>
> Les escribo en esta oportunidad para participarlos en una situación que se
> ha dado en las últimas semanas en LACRALO, referente a la situación de
> Humberto Carrasco como candidato a miembro de ALAC, teniendo su residencia
> actual en Edimburgo y el posible conflicto con los principios operativos de
> LACRALO en la regla numero 8 (Citada mas abajo).
>
>
> He recibido mail del Staff de ICANN inclusive, consultando esta situación
> particular, y varios mails de miembros de la región preocupados y con dudas
> acerca de las elecciones próximas. Y se ha convertido en un tema que merece
> la discusión y el conocimiento de la región.
>
>
> Antes de enviar este email, tuve oportunidad de hablar personalmente con
> Humberto y el comparte la idea de debatir entre todos esta situación.
>
>
>
> De todas las consultas y charlas que he tenido arme un resumen de las
> situaciones y preocupaciones generales y las comparto con ustedes para que
> puedan opinar.
>
>
>
> Saludos
>
>
> José Arce.-
>
> Presidente de LACRALO
>
>
>
> *Lugar de residencia de Humberto Carrasco*
>
> Humberto está viviendo en Edimburgo, Escocia, y está estudiando un
> Doctorado en la Universidad de Edimburgo. Él mismo ha expresado esta
> situación cuando envió un correo electrónico a la lista de discusión de
> LACRALO, aceptando la nominación propuesta como representante de LACRALO
> ante ALAC.
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-es/2012/004678.html
>
> También existen correos electrónicos en la lista de discusión de LACRALO
> donde él solicita que lo llamen para una teleconferencia de LACRALO, donde
> brinda un número telefónico de Escocia para recibir la llamada.
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/2012/005262.html
>
> Además en la página personal de Facebook, donde cada uno de los usuarios
> brinda los datos que quiere brindar de manera voluntaria, Humberto ha
> expresado que vive en Edimburgo, Escocia.
>
> https://www.facebook.com/humberto.carrasco.376
>
>
>  <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/2012/005262.html>También
> en su perfil personal de Facebook, Humberto ha expresado que comenzó sus
> estudios en la Universidad de Edimburgo en el año 2011. Como es de público
> conocimiento, estudiar un  Doctorado de la rama que fuere, demanda mucho
> más que un año de estudio, por lo que se infiere que todavía está viviendo
> en Edimburgo y estudiando su Doctorado en la Universidad de Edimburgo.
>
> https://www.facebook.com/humberto.carrasco.376/info
>
>
>
> *Requisitos de residencia para estudiar un Doctorado en la Universidad de
> Edimburgo (Escocia)*
>
> En el enlace que se acompaña se detallan los requisitos de residencia para
> estudiar un Doctorado en Edimburgo en el sector de las telecomunicaciones
> como el que Humberto está realizando.
>
> http://www.drps.ed.ac.uk/08-09/regulations/postgrad.php
>
> Entre esos requisitos contenidos en el punto 4 se exige que los candidatos
> a PhD deben mantener su *residencia en Edimburgo* *durante el período de
> estudio* (en Doctorados tienen un mínimo de 3 años de duración) a menos que
> una licencia de ausencia haya sido permitida. *Se entiende por residencia
> en Edimburgo: residencia en la ciudad de Edimburgo o en sus inmediaciones,
> y proximidad del candidato a Edimburgo, para permitir la facilidad de las
> reuniones cara a cara con sus supervisores y el estudio, dirigido por el
> supervisor y aprobado por la Facultad*.
>
> Este documento de la Universidad de Edimburgo también establece la
> posibilidad de residencia en otro lugar para candidatos a PhD para fines de
> trabajo de campo e investigaciones académicas siempre que no excedan el
> plazo de 15 meses, aunque debiendo residir al menos durante 9 meses de la
> duración de su Doctorado en Edimburgo. Para hacer uso de esta posibilidad
> los candidatos deberán obtener la autorización por escrito del Director de
> la Facultad y con la exigencia de mantener un contacto regular con su
> propio supervisor.
>
> Los permisos para razones distintas a trabajos de campo o investigaciones
> académicas, serán concedidos de manera excepcional por la Facultad.
>
> *Requisitos para los representantes de LACRALO ante ALAC*
>
> La primera regla a la que debemos acudir es a nuestros Principios
> Operativos de LACRALO, que tienen contemplada esta situación de manera
> expresa, taxativa y clara.
>
> En caso de que haya laguna en ese tema en nuestros Principios Operativos,
> recién ahí se deben recurrir a reglas externas, como las Reglas de
> Procedimiento de ALAC, y recién luego a los Estatutos de ICANN.
>
> Las Reglas de Procedimiento de ALAC, no tienen nada previsto sobre este
> tema. Los estatutos de ICANN se refieren a la residencia, pero solo con
> respecto a los Directores de la Junta y para cumplir con el requisito de la
> diversidad regional que está contemplada y exigida de manera expresa para
> poder ser miembros.
>
> *Principios Operativos de LACRALO*
>
> Los Principios Operativos de LACRALO disponen en su principio número 8,
> primer párrafo referido a los representantes de LACRALO ante ALAC de manera
> expresa:
>
> “8. La LACRALO elegirá a dos (2) individuos para servir como representantes
> ante el At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), en los términos que han sido
> especificados en los estatutos de ICANN. Sólo aquellas ALS que hayan sido
> acreditadas antes de la votación, podrán votar en la elección. Cada ALS
> acreditada tendrá derecho a un voto. Los *representantes seleccionados *deben
> ser miembros de diferentes ALS, *deben tener su lugar de residencia
> principal en diferentes países de la región*, y sus nacionalidades deben
> ser distintas. Los representantes tendrán a su cargo las responsabilidades
> estipuladas en los estatutos del ICANN”.*
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2264378/Principios%2520Operativos%2520de%2520la%2520LACRALO%2520Rev1%2520-%220ES%2520.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1283972736000
> *
>
>
>
> *Interpretación de los abogados de ICANN*
>
> Sam Eisner writes =>
>
> **STARTS**
>
> The LACRALO may wish to consider how issues of diversity are discussed in
> the ICANN Bylaws for the purposes of determining domicile/residency:
>
> For purposes of this sub-section 2 of Article VI, Section 2 of
> the ICANN Bylaws, if any candidate for director maintains citizenship of
> more than one country, or has been domiciled for more than five years in a
> country of which the candidate does not maintain citizenship ("Domicile"),
> that candidate may be deemed to be from either country and must select in
> his/her Statement of Interest the country of citizenship or Domicile that
> he/she wants the Nominating Committee to use for Diversity Calculation
> purposes. For purposes of this sub- section 2 of Article VI, Section 2 of
> the ICANN Bylaws, a person can only have one "Domicile," which shall be
> determined by where the candidate has a permanent residence and place of
> habitation.
>
> There are considerations of issues of citizenship (which don't seem to be
> at issue with this candidate) and where he lives.  The NomCom requirement
> sets a 5-year window – which could allow for items such as schooling, etc.
>  The LACRALO may wish to consider whether a school's requirement that a
> matriculant live near the school to further his education equals a
> requirement that the matriculant no longer maintain any sort of residence
> elsewhere – and they may wish to discuss this with the candidate before
> taking a decision on whether the candidacy is viable.  Whatever decision is
> taken, I would recommend getting a full view of the facts from the
> candidate, and not basing a decision fully on independent internet
> research.
>
> I don't see in the ALAC ops document that there's any discussion of
> residency requirements, so I don't see a conflict there.
>
> ** ENDS**
>
> En la consulta realizada a los abogados de ICANN, expresan lo expresado
> arriba. Aunque se olvidan que cuando la situación presentada está
> contemplada de manera expresa en nuestros estatutos, debemos recurrir en
> primer lugar, a ellos. Además hacen referencia a las elecciones a cargo del
> NomCom, que se rigen por reglas diferentes a las de LACRALO.
>
> En este caso, estamos buscando elegir por la región, a un representante de
> LACRALO ante ALAC. Se tienen que aplicar las reglas que rigen en nuestra
> región, no las del NomCom. Las del NomCom se aplicarán cuando se elijan
> candidatos a su cargo, que no es nuestro caso.
>
> Aplicar reglas de extraña jurisdicción afectan la *independencia y
> autonomía que debe tener un RALO: la posibilidad de dictar por sus propios
> estatutos y regirse por ellos*.
>
> *
> *
>
> *¿Cómo se debe interpretar el requisito de la residencia?*
>
> Legalmente, la residencia implica dos elementos: el *corpus *y el *animus*.
> Es decir, encontrarse físicamente en un lugar (con el cuerpo de la persona
> en dicho lugar, viviendo en determinado lugar) y además dicha persona debe
> tener la intención, el *animus*, de permanecer allí.
>
> En la documentación acompañada queda demostrado que Humberto Carrasco,
> vive, reside, tiene su *corpus* en Edimburgo  y además que tiene la
> intención (el *animus*) de permanecer allí, debido a que aún se encuentra
> estudiando su Doctorado y para finalizarlo deberá continuar viviendo en
> Edimburgo, tal como se lo exigen los reglamentos de residencia para los
> Doctorados de la Universidad de Edimburgo.
>
> Además es propio y de la naturaleza de la residencia, que una persona no
> puede tener dos o más residencia, en distintos lugares y al mismo tiempo,
> debido principalmente a que una persona sólo dispone de un cuerpo. Es
> decir, en nuestro caso, Humberto no puede tener su residencia, vivir, en
> Edimburgo y en Chile, al mismo tiempo.
>
> También vienen en ayuda para determinar la residencia de las personas,
> generalmente, las legislaciones en materia tributaria de cada país. Porque
> se entiende como regla general, que todos los ciudadanos tributan en el
> país en el que viven o tienen su residencia principal. Salvo excepciones,
> en las que una persona aún viviendo en un determinado país, deberá tributar
> en otro país, si en el segundo tiene fuente de ingresos.
>
> Si se sostiene que Humberto tiene residencia en Chile, recurrimos a la
> legislación tributaria de dicho país, especialmente la referida al Impuesto
> sobre las Rentas provenientes de bienes situados en Chile o de actividades
> desarrolladas en él, es decir, de fuente chilena.
>
> Para la legislación chilena se entiende entonces por residencia, a los
> fines tributarios a:
>
> *"Residente", toda persona natural que permanezca en Chile más de seis
> meses en un año calendario, o más de seis meses en total, dentro de dos
> años tributarios consecutivos,  *
>
> Por lo tanto, debemos preguntarnos, partiendo de que una persona no puede
> tener dos residencias diferentes y al mismo tiempo, si ser residente en
> Chile implica estar más de seis meses en el país, y por otro lado, los
> reglamentos de residencia de la Universidad de Edimburgo, le exigen a
> Humberto residir en Edimburgo o sus inmediaciones durante el plazo de sus
> estudios, ¿cómo podría residir al mismo tiempo en Chile y en Edimburgo?
>
> *
> *
>
> *El quid a discutir es (desde mi punto de vista):*
>
> Se incumple el requisito de la residencia que establecen  los Principios
> Operativos de LACRALO *“tener su lugar de residencia principal en
> diferentes países de la región” por tener Humberto Carrasco actualmente su
> residencia en Edimburgo?*
>
> Espero que podamos debatir este tema para hacer transparentes nuestros
> procesos.
> _______________________________________________
> lac-discuss-es mailing list
> lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
>
> http://www.lacralo.org





[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/0721a506b9.html
--]]




More information about the lac-discuss-en mailing list