29. Welcomes the setting-up on 6 December 2012 by the DRC Parliament of the National Human Rights Commission, as outlined in the constitution, as a prior step to passing a law on the protection of victims and witnesses of human rights abuses, human rights activists, aid workers and journalists;

29. Welcomes the setting-up on 6 December 2012 by the DRC Parliament of the National Human Rights Commission, as outlined in the constitution, as a prior step to passing a law on the protection of victims and witnesses of human rights abuses, human rights activists, aid workers and journalists;

That, in the opinion of the House, the Indian Act is the embodiment of failed colonial and paternalistic policies which have denied First Nations their rights, fair share in resources; fostered mistrust and created systemic barriers to the self-determination and success of First Nations, and that elimination of these barriers requires the government to initiate a formal process of direct engagement with First Nations within three months of passage of this motion, on a nation-to-nation basis, which focuses on replacing the Indian Act with new agreements based on: (a) the constitutional, treaty, and inherent ...[+++]rights of all First Nations; (b) the historical and fiduciary responsibilities of the Crown to First Nations; (c) the standards established in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including the principle of free, prior, and informed consent; (d) respect, recognition, reconciliation and support for First Nations; (e) partnership and mutual accountability between the Crown and First Nations; and (f) stability and safety of First Nations; and that this process be completed within two years before reporting with a series of concrete deliverables for the government to act upon.

First nations communities right across the country were absolutely outraged for one simple reason: the government did not respect the long-standing principle of fair and open consultation prior to any legislation coming through.

According to the legal framework established for the Dot.EU Registry, the Commission is not responsible for deciding on the interpretation of national law in connection with the validation of prior rights.

(16) The adoption of a public policy addressing speculative and abusive registration of domain names should provide that holders of prior rights recognised or established by national and/or Community law and public bodies will benefit from a specific period of time (a "sunrise period") during which the registration of their domain names is exclusively reserved to such holders of prior rights recognised or established by national and/or Co ...[+++]mmunity law and public bodies.