HARICA votes "yes" to ballot 192.
Dimitris.
On 14/6/2017 8:01 μμ, Jeremy Rowley via Public wrote:
From the validation WG:
*Ballot 192 – Notary Revisions*
The following motion has been proposed by Jeremy Rowley of DigiCert
and endorsed by Kirk Hall of Entrust and Rich Smith of Comodo.
Currently, section 11.11.1(A)(ii) states,
11.11.1. Verified Legal Opinion
(1) Verification Requirements: Before relying on a legal
opinion submitted to the CA, the CA MUST verify that such legal
opinion meets the following requirements:
(A) Status of Author: The CA MUST verify that the legal
opinion is authored by an independent legal practitioner retained by
and representing the Applicant (or an in-house legal practitioner
employed by the Applicant) (Legal Practitioner) who is either:
…
(ii) A notary that is a member of the International Union of Latin
Notaries, and is licensed to practice in the country of the
Applicant’s Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Registration or any
jurisdiction where the Applicant maintains an office or physical
facility (and that such jurisdiction recognizes the role of the Latin
Notary);
The EV Guidelines already define “Latin Notary” appropriately and
sufficiently as “A person with legal training whose commission under
applicable law not only includes authority to authenticate the
execution of a signature on a document but also responsibility for the
correctness and content of the document. A Latin Notary is sometimes
referred to as a Civil Law Notary.”
Whether a Latin Notary (or Civil Law Notary) is a member of the IULN
should not be dispositive as to whether the person is competent and
qualified to provide a legal opinion. The current wording of section
11.11.1(A)(ii) means we cannot accept letters from proper Latin
Notaries (individuals) who aren’t members of the IULN.
By deleting the requirement that a Latin Notary be a member of the
International Union of Latin Notaries, this ballot permits a more
extensive view on who can provide the type of legal opinion required
by the EV Guidelines.
--MOTION BEGINS--
A. Effective immediately, modify 11.11.1(A) as follows:
'''11.11.1. Verified Legal Opinion'''
(1) '''Verification Requirements''': Before relying on a legal opinion
submitted to the CA, the CA MUST verify that such legal opinion meets
the following requirements:
(A) '''Status of Author''': The CA MUST verify that the legal opinion
is authored by an independent legal practitioner retained by and
representing the Applicant (or an in-house legal practitioner employed
by the Applicant) (Legal Practitioner) who is either:
(i) A lawyer (or solicitor, barrister, advocate, or equivalent)
licensed to practice law in the country of the Applicant’s
Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Registration or any jurisdiction
where the Applicant maintains an office or physical facility, or
(ii) A notary that is a member of the International Union of Latin
Notaries, and is _Latin Notary who is currently commissioned or_
licensed to practice in the country of the Applicant’s Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Registration or any jurisdiction where the Applicant
maintains an office or physical facility (and that jurisdiction
recognizes the role of the Latin Notary);
--MOTION ENDS—
The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:
BALLOT 192
Start time (22:00 UTC)
End time (22:00 UTC)
Discussion (7 to 14 days)
15th June
21st June
Vote for approval (7 days)
21^st June
28th June
Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread on the
Public list. A vote in favor of the motion must indicate a clear 'yes'
in the response. A vote against must indicate a clear 'no' in the
response. A vote to abstain must indicate a clear 'abstain' in the
response. Unclear responses will not be counted. The latest vote
received from any representative of a voting member before the close
of the voting period will be counted. Voting members are listed here:
https://cabforum.org/members/
In order for the motion to be adopted, two thirds or more of the votes
cast by members in the CA category and greater than 50% of the votes
cast by members in the browser category must be in favor. Quorum is
shown on CA/Browser Forum wiki. Under Bylaw 2.2(g), at least the
required quorum number must participate in the ballot for the ballot
to be valid, either by voting in favor, voting against, or abstaining.
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
