[cabfpub] Ballot 192 - Notary revision

[Dimitris Zacharopoulos]

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
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170628/bb106cd9/attachment-0003.html>