ICANN and the Public interest

[Elsa S]

It’s also good to note that these two instances were not the only ones,
however I shared them here promptly, for the sake of providing a couple of
examples. I’m sure others on the PC would be able to provide more details :)

Best,

Elsa
—

On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:24 PM Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Tomslin,
>
> Thanks for the question!
>
> Actually in Kobe, (off the top of my head) we had a meeting with the board
> where Global Public Interest was discussed. I’m pretty sure if you look at
> the archives of that meeting which I think was recorded, you’d find several
> statements by NCSG reps on the issue in conversation with board members. I
> remember quite vividly that we mentioned, it’s best not to use the term
> loosely, if at all.
>
> We’ve also raised the issue of the use of “global public interest” most
> recently at the GNSO Council level. The board recently sent a letter to the
> coyncil about Phase 1 of the EPDP and referred to “Global Public Interest”
> in their reasoning for concern within the letter. NCSG pushed for
> expressing concern about the use of the term in the letter from the GNSO
> Council and our wording was incorporated into the GNSO Council’s reply.
> This should definitely be in the archives.
>
> Apologies that i will not be able to provide links at the moment, however
> I thought the question needed to be answered promptly.
>
> E.
> —
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 8:25 PM Tomslin Samme-Nlar <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Milton for the nudge and thanks Rafik for the details.
>>
>> @Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> , you said "*Even though NCSG in the past
>> year as far as I’ve seen, has been pushing for not using the word from the
>> start,*" do we (NCSG) have any formal statement on this recorded
>> somewhere that I can take a look at?
>>
>>
>> Tomslin
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 at 10:05, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the details about public consultation below. I created a google doc so
>>> we can start the drafting for a NCSG Comment
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nZJ91SSW55Isl2iBAEASopfYnWcsgsBcXdB5hUUjNdI/edit.
>>> you can listen to webinar recordings  here
>>> https://community.icann.org/display/prjxplrpublicint/GPI+Toolkit .
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> From 18 September – 18 October 2019, a community consultation is taking
>>> place on the global public interest framework proposed by the ICANN
>>> Board. In reviewing the proposal, the ICANN Board is asking the ICANN
>>> community to consider the following questions for input to the ICANN Board:
>>>
>>> 1.  What are your thoughts on the proposed framework approach? Do you
>>> have any suggestions for how it could be improved?
>>>
>>> 2.  What are your thoughts on the proposed approach for decisions in
>>> the ICANN ecosystem to be accompanied by a consideration of their impact on
>>> the global public interest (as well as an explanation regarding what is
>>> meant by the GPI in the specific case)?
>>>
>>> 3.  How do you see this working for the Supporting Organization (SO),
>>> Advisory Committee (AC), constituency, group, review team, or
>>> cross-community working group (CCWG) to which you are contributing?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The global public interest is central to many of ICANN’s primary
>>> governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in
>>> facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework
>>> as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest.
>>> These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are
>>> made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the
>>> commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific
>>> recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the globalpublic interest.
>>> This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the
>>> public interest determination the latter must make in its decisions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper
>>> [r20.rs6.net]
>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-3D0014631p6ECz1koeg6ajMSzZrFT7DO05069BKNDJvhNpKDU-2D38mdcxCqJ1EJzj5gscgfkGfGj-2DFGI3o7d-5FcGAxvEYcLuDt-2DuNbFw7pLtAPwsOOBVyljJ-5FnOUkAdXGEq-5Fpqhnx9MAz7aDEHi3hvOaYb3gqWjXDXghZrpf0Ca1iUZzXdnGBbim2ZY09p7WU0m-2DXOMIhpn2CTVR7lR4v-2DDeX-5F4RZFHV0Vx2gnIRwJwkZKqQoiglVM4l6PG-2Df7xB-5FIkXMVwTDMtu5FHvXFhlTLLJIN5Jg-3D-3D-26c-3Dz44JySTIvEGqNJPIjwWImwF59dG21I-2DoxnM1Mz6G5PmaucLg5GaW-5Fg-3D-3D-26ch-3DFcbT1z5bmkz6UEfk6eUJehq3ywPR-5FHTaxr7BzhY6q17TcrAkO831rw-3D-3D&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=Zrm2TmioSoHmD-RVsf08eb9s33A4I2k08_uP0LOo_zA&s=Y1oSQaaaH67cndtqhCcGryOkThAU0RpFNJVzZzD0mGc&e=>.
>>> Community feedback is welcome by *Friday, 18 October 2019 via email at **gpitoolkit at icann.org
>>> <gpitoolkit at icann.org>*. After the community consultation, there will
>>> be a public session at ICANN66, followed by a Public Comment proceeding.
>>>
>>> Le mar. 24 sept. 2019 à 08:53, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Thanks for sharing Milton!
>>>>
>>>> ICANN seems adamant about using the terms on a context to context basis
>>>> given the new proposed path forward, also shared in two webinars this month.
>>>>
>>>> Even though NCSG in the past year as far as I’ve seen, has been pushing
>>>> for not using the word from the start, it seems we might have to actively
>>>> work on mitigating the risk of its use in a more structurally biased way.
>>>>
>>>> I’m keeping an eye out for any developments on the consultation phase
>>>> (even though I would have preferred a formal public comment phase instead),
>>>> but would also invite that we all have a discussion about the proposed way
>>>> forward by ICANN, more meticulously and collectively.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Elsa
>>>> —
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:59 PM Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I was reading some scholarly literature about public service
>>>>> broadcasting and came across this statement from a GigaNet colleague, Yik
>>>>> Chin:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> “The Constitution of the PRC indeed speaks the language of the Public
>>>>> Interest (PI), and the term regularly appears in legal provisions without
>>>>> definition. There have been no juridical interpretations of ‘PI’, either.
>>>>> This ambiguity gives discretionary power to the authorities to interpret
>>>>> ‘PI’ in ways that invade and deprive individuals of their rights. Chin, Y.C
>>>>> 2012.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Food for thought
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>>>>>
>>>>> School of Public Policy
>>>>>
>>>>> Georgia Institute of Technology
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Elsa Saade
>>>> Consultant
>>>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>>>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>>>>
>>> --
> --
>
> Elsa Saade
> Consultant
> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>
-- 
--

Elsa Saade
Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20190923/c825e74e/attachment.htm>