- Session Type (Workshop, Open Forum, etc.): Round table (60 minutes)
- Title: A Multistakeholder Approach to HRIAs: Lessons from ICANN
http://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2018-ws-349-a-multistakeholder-approach-to-hrias-lessons-from-icann
- Date & Time: Wednesday 14 November at 12:30pm
- Organizer(s): Collin Kurre, Bruna Martins dos Santos, Louise Marie Hurel
- Chair/Moderator: Bruna Martins dos Santos
- Rapporteur/Notetaker: Louise Marie Hurel
- List of speakers and their institutional affiliations (Indicate male/female/ transgender male/ transgender female/gender variant/prefer not to answer):
- Speaker 1: Jorge Cancio, Government, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
- Speaker 2: Michele Neylon, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
- Speaker 3: Collin Kurre, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
- Speaker 4: Tulika Bansal, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
- Theme (as listed here): Human Rights, Gender, and Youth
- Subtheme (as listed here): Other - Human Rights Impact Assessments
- Please state no more than three (3) key messages of the discussion. [150 words or less]
This panel explored the intersection of business, human rights and multistakeholder internet governance. Conversations centred on the topic of multistakeholder Human Rights Impact Assessments (HRIAs), which are currently being trialed for the first time ever within the ICANN community. Key messages:
-
It’s more difficult for companies operating in the digital space to assess how their operations will impact people than, say, mining or textile companies because it’s harder to define communities, pinpoint rights-holders, and predict how technology will evolve.
-
Nevertheless, tech companies and standard-setting bodies should have built-in processes to ensure accountability and human rights due diligence.
-
Multistakeholder impact assessments are an iterative, collaborative, and practical way to frame conversations, inform policy, and mitigate negative impacts.
- Please elaborate on the discussion held, specifically on areas of agreement and divergence. [150 words]
The challenge of defining rights-holders amongst internet users was highlighted by many, yet yet there was broad support for companies and standard-setting bodies to introduce and act upon human rights commitments. One area of divergence related to which subset of rights should be prioritized, e.g. children’s, cultural, or LGBTQI rights. Examples were given to demonstrate that impact assessment methodologies can be tailored to address specific, or various, categories of rights. As a result, participants suggested that such tools can make the subject of human rights more practical and tangible, or allow people with divergent positions to engage in a constructive way.
- Please describe any policy recommendations or suggestions regarding the way forward/potential next steps. [100 words]
Several individuals offered to contribute to ongoing efforts to carry out impact assessments on DNS policy in the ICANN community. A few DNS companies also expressed interest in incorporating human rights due diligence into their internal processes. There was widespread, multistakeholder support for organizing a High-interest Cross-community Session on the subject of human rights during ICANN64 in March 2019. Potential co-coordinators suggested were the GAC Public Safety and International Human Rights Law Working Groups, the NCSG Cross-Community Working Party on Human Rights, and the NCUC.
- What ideas surfaced in the discussion with respect to how the IGF ecosystem might make progress on this issue? [75 words]
A recurring theme throughout the session was the benefit of bridging the Internet Governance community with the Business and Human Rights field. The IGF ecosystem provided a unique and efficient platform for generating actionable project ideas on this subject. As conversations progress, the IGF community could continue serving as connective tissue between these fields and assist with prioritizing which types of assessments could be applied to internet companies and policy — gender impact, regulatory impact, human rights, etc.
- Please estimate the total number of participants.
45
- Please estimate the total number of women and gender-variant individuals present?
22
- To what extent did the session discuss gender issues, and if to any extent, what was the discussion?
Specific impacts of DNS policy on LGBTQI and children’s rights were briefly touched on as elements that can and should be assessed. However, the session was primarily focused on the introduction and operationalization of human rights considerations more broadly.