<div dir="ltr">Hi Joy,<div><br></div><div>+ 1, good idea about clearinghouse, we have multiplication of new fora like Internet Freedom Coalition or also Cyber london conf (and so Budapest, Seoul) . even for ITU we have CWG. maybe time to have discussion on how CS can really be present in all these spaces and can be effective because I do think that is not really sustainable .</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Best,</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Rafik </div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/8/22 joy <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:joy@apc.org" target="_blank">joy@apc.org</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- <br>
Hash: SHA1 <br>
<br>
Hi all - just wanting to add some thoughts on the agenda and thanks
for preparing a draft Jeremy<br>
Copying the original agenda back in for ease of reference:<br>
*Day 1*<div class="im"><br>
<br>
1) Best Bits itself: goals, structure, processes, fundraising,
interactions with other groups, etc. The interim steering group is
working on a documents with our brainstorming about all this, which
we will share soon. The purpose of this session is to reach a
consensus that we are heading in the right direction (or not), and
to provide a mandate to carry out proposals that will help us grow
and become stronger and more sustainable.<br>
<br>
2) Global Internet governance principles and Enhanced Cooperation.
As you know, there are groups at the IGF MAG and the CSTD discussing
these issues, but until now there has been no strong unified civil
society position about the evolution of Internet governance
arrangements, and this equivocation has played into the wrong
hands. We have been largely split between groups that are averse to
any changes, and those with proposals for changes that are seen as
radical. The purpose of this session (as I see it, anyway) is to
get together behind a shared position that can become a solid base
for advocacy. We already have a working group arguing over these
issues (in a good way), which will report back to this main list
soon.<br>
<br></div>
JL: it would be a shame if the only focus of this session was the
for and against debate about current arrangements. There are other
pressing internet governance issues including for developing
countries access and national internet governance processes,
capacity building and best practice among others. can some time be
made for these as well?<br>
<br>
<br>
*Day 2*<br>
JL: I agree we should not be ITU-centric. Can we include a brief
clearinghouse session (perhaps we can start a thread on it before
the meeting) looking at the range of other forums which might be
relevant for inputs - to help ensure that wider focus<br>
The surveillance session: i agree it should be a key focus and would
emphasise to look at the implications of trends in the range of
invasive and threatening actions being taken by diverse governments
and then at the strategies for civil society to respond. I know for
example, that many civil society groups which are leading on secure
online communciations training for human rights defenders are doing
some deep thinking about how to respond to surveillance at a
practical not only policy level.<br>
<br>
Finally, should there be a session focused on IGF itself: the
programme, side events and so on and sharing if there are any
particular sessions or workshops that Best Bits feels strongly
should have focus or which would be strategically important to have
input to.<br>
<br>
thanks<br>
<br>
Joy<div class="im"><br>
On 14/08/2013 2:16 a.m., Anne Jellema wrote:<br>
</div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"><div class="im">> This is great, Parminder. I
leave it to others to comment on whether it should be the sole
focus of CSO discussions at Bali, or one strand among others - but
it is definitely something that Best Bits and Web We Want could
plan together, as it's an excellent fit with the Web We Want
mission of consolidating and promoting a positive vision for the
future of the open Web. <br>
> Beyond coming out with a statement ... even better would be
coming out with an action plan!<br>
> cheers<br>
> Anne<br>
><br>
><br></div><div class="im">
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 4:18 AM, parminder
<<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>
<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank"><mailto:parminder@itforchange.net></a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> Thanks to the steering committee for this great start....<br>
><br>
> I havent much to say about day 1. Maybe a few things, but
that later...<br>
><br>
> Abut day 2<br>
><br>
> I think we would do well if we try not to look very ITU
centric ( and I can assure, we do)... Last year was different with
the WCIT in the offing, but this year I dont see why a session
should focus on ITU.<br>
><br>
> As to saying that Snowden or NSA revelations can become a
sub item of this ITU discussion, quite the opposite is what I
think would be in order..<br>
><br>
> Lets be honest, and do justice to the people of the world
in whose name we assemble, work and expend monies.... Internet
governance to the world right now is completely focussed on the
Snowden affair. Not only among the laity, but even the politically
well informed and articulate.<br>
><br>
> It is bad enough that the IGF wont largely be about NSA
revelations (even to the extent that Kenya IGF was about the
India's CIRP proposal) although I will be happy to be pleasantly
surprised. But I cant see how a civil society meeting can afford
to be not about it. This is my basic proposition..<br>
><br>
> I think we need to have a session on something very
roughly like the 'The global Internet after Snowden - What will
balkanise the Internet and what can keep it sufficiently global' -
and if possible come out with a statement about it.<br>
><br>
> At the time of formation of BB, we had promised ourselves
a positive agenda , and flogging ITU over a day once again is not
what I think takes us towards that. (Disclaimer: I have long held
that the ITU is not the right place for most global IG work.)<br>
><br>
> People are interested to know in which directions would
post Snowden global Internet go. And we should discuss this.<br>
><br>
> Lets cut the chaff and go directly to what is/ are the
issue(s) of global governance of the Internet today. For instance
- what are the global ethics, norms, principles and legal
frameworks for trans-border flow of data, information and digital
services? Who should develop ( ensure their compliance) and how?<br>
><br>
> And wh- at is the meaning of ownership of our digital
lives, and how statist and corporatist controls play with such
rightful ownership.<br>
><br>
> That is what people right now most want to know... Do we
have anything to say to them, and perhaps say on the behalf of
them?<br>
><br>
> parminder<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Saturday 10 August 2013 09:06 PM, Jeremy Malcolm
wrote:<br>
>> Since the good news that the 2013 IGF will be going
ahead after all, it's time to revise and finalise the programme
for our annual meeting in Bali. The interim steering group has
been talking about this, and here was their suggestion for topics
(the descriptions are mine though):<br>
>><br></div>
>> *Day 1*<div class="im"><br>
>><br>
>> 1) Best Bits itself: goals, structure, processes,
fundraising, interactions with other groups, etc. The interim
steering group is working on a documents with our brainstorming
about all this, which we will share soon. The purpose of this
session is to reach a consensus that we are heading in the right
direction (or not), and to provide a mandate to carry out
proposals that will help us grow and become stronger and more
sustainable.<br>
>><br>
>> 2) Global Internet governance principles and Enhanced
Cooperation. As you know, there are groups at the IGF MAG and the
CSTD discussing these issues, but until now there has been no
strong unified civil society position about the evolution of
Internet governance arrangements, and this equivocation has played
into the wrong hands. We have been largely split between groups
that are averse to any changes, and those with proposals for
changes that are seen as radical. The purpose of this session (as
I see it, anyway) is to get together behind a shared position that
can become a solid base for advocacy. We already have a working
group arguing over these issues (in a good way), which will report
back to this main list soon.<br>
>><br></div>
>> *Day 2*<div class="im"><br>
>><br>
>> 3) The ITU processes, up to the ITU Plenipotentiary
in 2014 and the WSIS+10 review. What is coming up? What is our
long term strategy? Have we responded adequately to the ITU's
most recent refusal to open up the Council Working Group on
Internet Policy to stakeholders? If we still don't see change at
the Plenipotentiary, what then - do we disengage?<br>
>><br>
>> 4) The NSA surveillance issue may become a sub-item
of the ITU discussion, given that there are countries that may
bring this debate to the ITU. But it will also include an update
on the Human Rights Council, stateside developments, how this has
altered the Internet governance landscape in the long term, and
general strategy going forward.<br>
>><br>
>> There's also a lot of other work to be done between
now and then, including work on the website (so that you can
actually register for the meeting!) and on fundraising (to help
pay for it). I'll be posting more about that very soon.<br>
>><br>
>> Meanwhile your comments are invited on the
programme...<br>
>><br>
>> -- <br>
>><br></div>
>> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm<br>
>> Senior Policy Officer<br>
>> Consumers International | the global campaigning
voice for consumers*<div class="im"><br>
>> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East<br>
>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI,
60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia<br></div>
>> Tel: <a href="tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599" value="+60377261599" target="_blank">+60 3 7726 1599</a>
<tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599><div class="im"><br>
>><br>
>> Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer
movement knowledge hub |
<a href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone" target="_blank">http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone</a><br>
>><br></div>
>> @Consumers_Int | <a href="http://www.consumersinternational.org" target="_blank">www.consumersinternational.org</a>
<a href="http://www.consumersinternational.org" target="_blank"><http://www.consumersinternational.org></a> |
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational" target="_blank">www.facebook.com/consumersinternational</a>
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational" target="_blank"><http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational></a><br>
>><br>
>> Read our email confidentiality notice
<a href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality" target="_blank"><http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality></a>.
Don't print this email unless necessary.<div class="im"><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> -- <br>
> Anne Jellema<br>
> Chief Executive Officer<br>
> Cape Town, RSA<br>
> mob <a href="tel:%2B27%2061%20036%209652" value="+27610369652" target="_blank">+27 61 036 9652</a> <br>
> tel <a href="tel:%2B27%2021%20788%204585" value="+27217884585" target="_blank">+27 21 788 4585</a> <br>
> Skype anne.jellema<br>
> @afjellema <br>
> <br></div>
> World Wide Web Foundation | 1889 F Street NW, Washington DC,
20006, USA | <a href="http://www.webfoundation.org" target="_blank">www.webfoundation.org</a>
<a href="http://www.webfoundation.org/" target="_blank"><http://www.webfoundation.org/></a> | Twitter: @webfoundation</span><br>
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
<br>
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - <a href="http://www.enigmail.net/" target="_blank">http://www.enigmail.net/</a>
<br>
<br>
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSFW72AAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqlaYH/1VO5qy4FHaErnEKeq5IJ+lU
<br>
ayzyQWzcCFC5d4aztko5Js/Mp47qTnG745xm77cYRC1n1FyTWR3F7THUZYcJTWlJ
<br>
5AdNG7YcDhN7c4A+mnpnuUIPmzpnvO936GLSAn5BxByw3qNG4M1kDJaPh2Q31VQw
<br>
ReoiJSSSoQa+GG9IpMkrgyzRWNySQW3xVPUCiOKCeEv/A9zd3kxAPRfN5MlyG3Gf
<br>
KuWqE44RE75qdZhS8Pnp8bKM7F0+2vsl9ly7UNMHwecbILA5mkfG7gIcAVBmccE2
<br>
jSBNupV4z4caWkg3D0c+38WN1zPRma77mU4g3simF1JoEidQ0NoTjDkWDBIUFkM=
<br>
=q01i
<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>