I appreciate the back and forth here with regard to ICANN and human 
rights but I hope we do not lose sight of the core issue. There is near 
total agreement that ICANN and its remit are not in the business of 
addressing content issues on the Internet. Those have to be addressed 
elsewhere depending on their nature, and the contexts in which they exist

There is however a void here, and it is the need for a more explicit 
position by ICANN on what does and what doesn’t fall within its remit 
with regard to human rights. We can make an unending list of what ICANN 
should not do. That is the easy part. The hard part is to look at what 
is within ICANN's remit and figure out if there are areas where ICANN 
should consider the human rights concerns associated with what it does.

It may be the case that nothing ICANN does impacts on human rights. I 
doubt that. But determining if and where ICANN impacts on human rights 
through its policies and practices should be the outcome of analysis. 
That task is different from making a list of areas where ICANN should 
not be concerned. ICANN should have an answer to the question: "What is 
ICANN’s role in Human Rights on the Internet?".

It is not enough for ICANN to simply list where it shouldn’t be 
involved. The focus should be on where it is involved via its policies 
and practices. How well it handles human rights issues in those areas 
where it has an impact will, in the end, be judged by the wider Internet 
stakeholder community, and not by ICANN itself. This will be easier for 
ICANN if it has declared what it sees as its role in Human Rights, 
within the context of its remit, and as determined by its policies and 
its practices.

Sam L. Chair
NPOC Policy Committee