RE: [soac-mapo] Objection title

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

Thanks Olivier and Evan.  I personally think that we should avoid the use of 
the word ‘community’ with regard to Rec6 objections because it could cause 
confusion with the Community Objection process. 

 

Chuck

 

From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Evan Leibovitch
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 8:13 PM
To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Cc: soac-mapo
Subject: Re: [soac-mapo] Objection title

 

 

On 9 September 2010 19:30, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Ordre Public can be translated in English as "Public Policy", and not "Public 
Order" since the latter might have connotations principally of a criminal 
nature.
According to our telephone discussions, this appears not to be the same thing 
as "General Principles of International Law" either, since objections based on 
a government's evaluation of a word likely to cause local disruption would also 
be received by the DRSP.
I therefore suggest the translation of "Ordre Public", such as "Public Policy".



I like Olivier's reasoning.

And if, as has been suggested, substantial parts of the process are to be 
combined with community-based objections, the collective title could be simply:

"Community and Public Policy Objections"

"Public Policy" is IMO inclusive of "incitement" and "General Principles of 
International Law", but it also includes the possibility that objections will 
be submitted if a group believes that a string is grossly obscene. (It may not 
succeed in  getting blocked, but at least the string is "on record" as being 
offensive to someone.) Also, it nicely accommodates instances in which a 
government is objecting on behalf of one of its internal communities.

Another possible title, brief yet descriptive, is "Government and Community 
Objections", making general reference to the source rather than the purpose of 
the objections.

- Evan