Hi Kathy,
Thanks for the question. This is a question we pondered ourselves during
our recent CCWP-HR call a couple weeks ago. The prevailing idea is that
the assessment could be used for robust public comments and informed
interventions.
Another idea that surfaced last meeting was using the impact assessment
framework to facilitate external participation in PDPs, i.e. allow human
rights subject matter experts, governmental representatives, etc. to log
observations, recommendations, and interventions even if they're unable
to sustain engagement throughout the lifetime of the PDP. The standards
set out in the "Guidance" tab are intended to provide for a level of
continuity even if there are different individuals completing the
assessment, which would ideally allow NGOs or other under-resourced
groups to contribute to the process in a relay fashion even if they
don't have the resources for sustained engagement in PDPs.
What do you all think about that approach? Any other ideas or
suggestions? Of course, some pieces may fall into place once the WS2
recommendations are approved and implementation begins, but it never
hurts to contemplate and prepare ahead of time.
Kind regards,
Collin
On 27/05/2019 14:37, Kathy Kleiman wrote:
> Hi Akriti,
>
> It looks like some good and interesting work has been on the human
> rights impact assessment of the Subsequent Procedures Working Group (the
> PDP reviewing/writing the rules for applying for future New gTLDs).
>
> /My question is: how does this spreadsheet feed into any work taking
> place before the SubPro WG? /It is a major PDP WG, meeting once a week,
> largely dominated by incumbent registries (who are trying to make the
> rules easier and faster to get new gTLDs). Your spreadsheet raises
> issues of important checks and balances -- and protections --
> "Procedural fairness / due process - Equal treatment / non-
> descrimination' as well as "Economic, Cultural and Social Rights."
>
> Given the small number of active participants in SubPro, you and your
> Cross-Community Working Party could make a real difference if you
> participated and brought your concerns into our weekly SubbPro discussion.
>
> /Will you be coming back to join us? How will your human rights impact
> assessment Google Doc become part of the living and breathing work of
> ICANN's multistakeholder policy development process?/
>
> /
> /
>
> Best, Kathy
> //
>
> On 5/27/2019 6:49 AM, Akriti Bopanna wrote:
>> Well written blog, Raphael! On the point of assessments, that was our
>> aim in the CCWP-HR to conduct human right impact assessments and the
>> first PDP we chose was that of the Sub Pros one. You can find our
>> spreadsheet on relevant rights here -
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EKpMCef8kiZ2tJE2AU78q9_oeJehGbR7bWpQ5wt7D5I/edit#gid=853107611
>>
>> We are currently wondering which next PDP to target, suggestions from
>> everyone are welcome! :)
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Akriti
>>
>>
>> On 19/07/2018 23:35, Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> My joining this group was inadvertently timely!
>>>
>>> A blog post I recently wrote on the GDPR adventures of ICANN (and
>>> more generally on human rights at and within ICANN) is up on CircleID.
>>>
>>> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20180719_icann_at_a_crossroads_gdpr_and_human_rights/
>>>
>>>
>>> Feel free to have a read and comment!
>>>
>>> Looking forward to engaging further with all of you (although I
>>> unfortunately don't have time to volunteer for the ePDP...)
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Raphael
>
> --
> Kathy Kleiman
> Visiting Scholar, Center for Information Technology, Princeton University
> President (on leave), Domain Name Rights Coalition
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link>
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
--
Collin Kurre
Digital Program Officer
ARTICLE 19
|
