I think Niels is seriously misguided to think that we should not be asking Icann about the HR impact of its policies. I - and I think a lot of others in this constituency - will
Oppose asking that question at all if it is limited to ICANN' "organization". I mean what a waste of our time. Icann's main mission is to make policies - that's where the human rights implications are most salient. 

Milton L Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology

> On Nov 1, 2016, at 17:11, Niels ten Oever <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Dear Milton,
> 
> You chapnged the scope of question 4 and there is also still a typo in it.
> 
> The typo is one 'is' too many, it should be fixed like this:
> 
>> 4. What steps is the ICANN board making to implement a Human
>> Rights Impact Assessment of ICANN the organization?
> 
> Also changing the scope from organization to policies is not one I agree
> with. Am happy to elaborate in Hyderabad why that is the case.
> 
> In short: policies would also fall under 'organization', but not vice
> versa. If you're adamanent about this, we could also do:
> 
>> 4. What steps is the ICANN board making to implement a Human
>> Rights Impact Assessment of ICANN the organization and/or its
>> policies?
> 
> But I think that's worse.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Niels
> 
> 
>> On 11/01/2016 10:35 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>> Hi Milton,
>> 
>> Agreed, I was in too much of a hurry, your suggestions for 3 & 4 are better.
>> 
>> I also tend to agree with Dave that "ICANN legal" is better than
>> "ICANN lawyer", makes it look less like a personal attack.
>> 
>> Tapani
>> 
>>> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 08:37:32AM +0000, Mueller, Milton L ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
>>> 
>>> Tapani,
>>> You did a great job of phrasing the first question, which is a highly sensitive one, taking lots of input and forming it into a coherent question that meets all our concerns. 2nd one works well, too.
>>> 
>>> The 3rd and 4th questions on the other hand seem to be a bit confusing. Can you agree to rephrase them as follows?
>>> 
>>>> 3. In the Whois Complaint process, anonymous people can make complaints that he data is inaccurate and in some cases cause trouble for innocent registrants. Why doesn't ICANN ever investigate whether these allegations are intended to harass or intimidate registrants or are made for anti- competitive reasons?
>>>> 
>>>> 4. What steps is the ICANN board is making to implement a Human
>>>> Rights Impact Assessment of ICANN policies?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>>>> Tapani Tarvainen
>>>> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 9:30 AM
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Re: Topics for meeting with the board in Hyderabad?
>>>> 
>>>> Collecting and combining topics here's what I came up to ask the board. Way
>>>> past deadline, have to send it today, if anybody spots glaring errors please let
>>>> me know ASAP.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 1. How does the Board expect the the new complaint system to work when it
>>>> puts ICANN's lawyer, whose job is to protect the corporation from
>>>> complainers whether they are right or wrong, in charge of managing
>>>> complaints? Has the Board considered how it affects the independence of the
>>>> Ombudsman? As an example of our concerns, why there were no
>>>> repercussions for the abuses of TLD evaluation procedures in the Dot Registry
>>>> case?
>>>> 
>>>> 2. Does the Board continue to agree with Fadi Chehade's position of Summer
>>>> 2015 that ICANN does not police content,
>>>> https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-is-not-the-internet-content-police
>>>> (published by Alan Grogan, ICANN's Chief Contract Compliance Officer)?
>>>> Does the Board share our concerns that arrangements like the MPAA-Donuts
>>>> agreement are deeply inappropriate for the Domain Name System?
>>>> 
>>>> 3. The Whois Complaint process and why anonymous people can ask for
>>>> personal information about registrants. Why ICANN never investigates
>>>> whether these allegations are intended to harass, intimidate or for anti-
>>>> competitive reasons?
>>>> 
>>>> 4. What steps the ICANN board is making and when to implement a Human
>>>> Rights Impact Assessment of ICANN the organization?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Tapani Tarvainen
> 
> -- 
> Niels ten Oever
> Head of Digital
> 
> Article 19
> www.article19.org
> 
> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9