Subject: Re: [hrpc] Draft-HRPC-guidelines

From: Gurshabad Grover <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 14:22:20 +0530

Thanks a lot for the review!

The new version incorporates some suggestions. Please find specific
changes/comments below.

On 28/03/19 3:33 PM, Avri wrote:
> - I think that perhaps in the abstract or the intro, it should mention
> that these are considerations are still under test.  You indicate that
> they are being still being developed but not that they still need test
> for usefulness and validity. This is an activity I think we still need
> to develop a methodology for - some rigorous manner of testing and
> documenting the testing.

Added to the introduction: "The methods for conducting human rights
reviews (Section 3.2), and guidelines for human rights considerations
(Section 3.3) in this document are being tested for relevance, accuracy
and validity."

I agree that we still need to develop a method to evaluate the
usefulness of these guidelines. Open to suggestion on a more formal
method to do that (currently, we rely on feedback from individuals
writing HR reviews/considerations sections).

> - in 3.2.1 & 3.2.2 It seems to indicate that the considerations are not
> useful for doing an impact analaysis.  I think that when done in a last
> call review, they do contribute to doing an impact analysis. I think
> that might be a use we need to verify and test for, but I think it might
> be worth mentioning.  Though one distinction probably worth making is
> that use of the considerations while the protocol is in development is a
> process best done by those involved in the protocol development itself,
> while an impact analysis done as part of a last call is probably best
> done by an external observer.  So while I think it should be possible to
> use the same considerations in both processes, the way it is done and by
> whom probably varies.
> 

[discussed off-list, no changes made right now]

> - in 3.3 you mention that we do not discuss the issue of whether a HR
> considerations section should be added.  I do not think that is an IRTF
> task. We should be be developing the considerations and testing them for
> their use and reasonableness.  Any proposal to make them part of an IETF
> process should probably be left to some future IETF process.  One of the
> things we have had an issue with, and some pointed comments on, is
> crossing into the actual IETF engineering process.
> 

Removed "the addition of a human rights considerations section has also
not yet been proposed."

> - in 3.3.x, I think it would be good to point to where the HR that are
> impacted by by the consideration are discussed and explained.  I know
> this may creates cross references to work that is not yet done, but it
> seems to just be left unexplained in the current draft.  I think that if
> the doc says a consideration is useful for, e.g., for the right of
> political participation or for participation in cultural life ... we
> should explain why somewhere - not in this doc but in a doc specifically
> related to the right and considerations pertinent to that right. Also
> might be worth listing the UDHR  and para reference for each so that
> they can be looked up by readers.
> 

While the new version doesn't contain any edits to this effect, we will
spend some time thinking about how this can be done here or in other
documents.

Thank you.
-GG.