[NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] ICANN and the Public interest

[Rafik Dammak]

hi all,

the deadline for submission is 18th Oct, there is no volunteers in NCSG
list and we shouldn't miss this opportunity.

Best,

Rafik

Le mer. 2 oct. 2019 à 08:28, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> bringing this topic to PC again as we need drafter and working the NCSG
> response to the proposed framework.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> De : Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> Date: mar. 24 sept. 2019 à 09:05
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] ICANN and the Public interest
> To: NCSG <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>
>
> 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
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20191008/99c4e6cb/attachment.htm>