RE: [soac-mapo] Please participate - Poll on updated recommendations

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Margie/Marika,

 

I would like to request that you begin to develop a new Doodle poll with
the latest wording for recommendations that we are still working on,
including the one below.  At the same time, everyone should still feel
free to comment on Jon's suggestion.

 

Chuck

 

From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Jon Nevett
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 4:05 PM
To: Richard Tindal
Cc: soac-mapo
Subject: Re: [soac-mapo] Please participate - Poll on updated
recommendations

 

Richard:

 

Changing the scope of the existing Community Objection standard was,
indeed, my concern.  

 

Some folks may also have been concerned that 2.2 refers to national law
versus international law.  I understand the Recommendation 6 objections
must be based on International law, but this recommendation only relates
to Community objections.  Nations should be eligible as communities, but
there shouldn't be new standards of community objections based on this
point.    

 

I agree with Bertrand, as I think he mentioned on the last call, that
certain concerns based on national law fit within the existing Community
objection framework.  Therefore, I would support Recommendation 2.2.
with the following additions:

 

                "Recommendation 2.2: If individual governments have
objections based on contradiction with specific national laws, such
objections MAY be submitted through the Community Objections procedure
OUTLINED IN DAGv4."

 

I do not support a recommendation that we undo all of the work on the
scope of community objections that already appears in DAGv4.

 

Thanks.

 

Jon

 

 

 

On Sep 15, 2010, at 3:31 PM, Richard Tindal wrote:





I was also surprised by the number of 'no' votes on this.

 

In addition to the possible reasons suggested by Chuck (below) is it
because some felt that it implied a change to the existing Community
Objection standard?

 

Am interested to hear why people voted against this.

 

RT

 

 

On Sep 15, 2010, at 9:53 AM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:





I have concerns about the poll results so far on the following:

 

"Recommendation 2.2: If individual governments have objections based on
contradiction with specific national laws, such objections should be
submitted through the Community Objections procedure?"

It was my impression that this was a very important point for
governments and I believe that AGv4 allows it anyway.  For those that
oppose this, is it because you don't think it should be stated by this
group or do you think that the guidebook should be changed to not allow
this?  If the latter, I think that may be a problem in terms of getting
support of government members of our group.

 

Chuck

 

From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 2:28 PM
To: soac-mapo
Subject: [soac-mapo] Please participate - Poll on updated
recommendations
Importance: High

 

Dear All,

You'll hereby find the link to the doodle poll on the recommendations
that were updated on the basis of yesterday's discussion:
http://www.doodle.com/3qyfei92icsqw3ie . Please indicate in the poll for
each of the updated recommendations whether you support the
recommendation or not. You should use the attached document as your
reference tool. 

Please complete the poll at the latest by Wednesday 15 September at
17.00 UTC.

Thanks,

Marika