<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
As Anriette has already noted - in relation to the APC Charter the
full quote in Theme 6.1 is:<br>
<blockquote>Internet governance should be multilateral and
democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private
sector, civil society and international organisations. No single
government should have a pre-eminent role in relation to
international internet governance.<br>
</blockquote>
This does not mean that APC thinks that multi-stakeholder processes
are not democratic or desirable. Quite the contrary and APC has
been on record in many spaces to support multi-stakeholder
processes: these are simply one form of democratic participation. To
be fair, the Best Bits submisson cites a range of other documents
and says, taken together, certain principles relevant to internet
governance can be deduced and should be taken forward into
NetMundial, including human rights.<br>
<br>
I am happy to support the Best Bits submission: i think its 2
recommendations are simple, concise and helpful.<br>
<br>
It seems the logic of the objections being raised to endorsing the
Best Bits submission is along the lines that on the one hand:<br>
a) governments alone make public policy including some which is
relevant to internet governance<br>
b) governments should be on an equal footing with each other when
doing so; and <br>
c) it follows that non-governmental stakeholders cannot and
therefore should not be on an equal footing with governments this
role (though they can of course be involved/consulted) .<br>
<br>
Whereas, the Best Bits submission is premised along the lines that <br>
a) governments and multi-stakeholder processes make public policy
which is relevant to internet governance<br>
b) therefore all stakeholders should be on an equitable footing or
parity with each other when doing so; <br>
<br>
Again, I see no reason not to support the Best Bits submission which
simply proposes that whatever internet governance principles
NetMundial is considering, equitable multi-stakholder participation
and human rights (among others) are relevant to them. <br>
<br>
<br>
Joy<br>
Joy<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/03/2014 9:14 p.m., Anriette
Esterhuysen wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:53182E74.5060401@apc.org" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<font face="Arial">Dear all<br>
<br>
Just a clarification here on the APC Internet Rights Charter and
the use of 'multilateral'.<br>
<br>
</font>The full text in Theme 6.1 is:<br>
<br>
"Internet governance should be multilateral and democratic, with
the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil
society and international organisations. No single government
should have a pre-eminent role in relation to international
internet governance."<br>
<br>
When we drafted this text we used 'multilateral' in its dictionary
sense as meaning the involvement of multiple parties and multiple
countries. We did not mean it in the 'intergovernmental' sense.<br>
<br>
In fact.. the text that follows multilateral and democratic
defines how we understood the term: "with the full involvement of
governments, the private sector, civil society and international
organisations. No single government should have a pre-eminent role
in relation to international internet governance."<br>
<br>
Since then (remember we first drafted the charter in 2001) the
term multilateral has become loaded and is often underestood as
meaning "among governments". It was not our intention to suggest
that. But we certainly did mean that governments should be
involved, and that no one government should dominate - but in the
context of the involvement of other stakeholders too.<br>
<br>
Best<br>
<br>
Anriette<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 05/03/2014 14:29, parminder wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:531718AC.3040402@itforchange.net"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Wednesday 05 March 2014 05:19
PM, parminder wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:53170F61.60305@itforchange.net"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Wednesday 05 March 2014 05:09
PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2E3D5FD7-A108-4A16-977A-2650F624CA82@Malcolm.id.au"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
On 5 Mar 2014, at 7:21 pm, parminder <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
<div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"
style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px;
font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight:
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal;
orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows:
auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px;">And of course, the proposed view to be submitted
on 1Net's behalf has this all important principle,
"Decisions made with respect to Internet governance
should only be made by bodies that allow free and
equitable access to all stakeholders at all points in
the decision-making process." Well of course. Two
hoots to democracy!<br>
<br>
Now I shall come to the point, of my comments on the
proposed submission to NetMundial submitted by Jeremy.<br>
<br>
I of course support and commend both APC Principles
and IRP Principles - which seem the main burden of
the submission.... BUT...<br>
<i><b><br>
</b></i><i><b>Can someone explain me the meaning of
"equitable multistakeholder participation"</b></i><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>and whether it
is different from what is meant in the above statement
from 1Net's survey. If so, how.... More precisely, are
you seeking that all stakeholders, including business
reps, have equal part and role (as gov reps) in making
decisions about public policies. Please address this
point specifically.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yes, you picked up on a key point. There was a
discussion of this on the pad where the text was
workshopped, which you can read for yourself: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://pad.riseup.net/p/IG_principles">https://pad.riseup.net/p/IG_principles</a>.
At various times it was "parity" and "power sharing"
before it became "equitable participation", which is
somewhat flexible, to accommodate the different
viewpoints that we all have about how equal the
stakeholder roles should be.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
I dont greatly like flexibility between democracy and
non-democracy. <br>
<br>
So, request a clear response - do you mean <i><b>parity</b></i>
in <i><b>decision making</b></i> about <i><b>public policies
</b></i>between gov and non gov actors.... </blockquote>
<br>
<br>
It is important to note that the two main Principles docs that
this CS contribution refers to speak of democracy but not
multistakeholder governance, much less 'equitable MSism'..<br>
<br>
In fact the APC Principles doc speaks of "<font
face="sans-serif"><font style="font-size: 11pt" size="3">The
right to multilateral democratic oversight of the Internet.
Internet governance</font></font><font face="sans-serif"><font
style="font-size: 11pt" size="3"> should be multilateral and
democratic.</font></font>
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
-->
</style>"<br>
<br>
Obviously, what is the main, unique, and new element in this
present submission - equitable multistakeholder participation -
does not come from the 2 key docs which are claimed to be the
principle inspirations.<br>
<br>
Ok, lets next check the 3 other principles docs that are also
quoted as somewhat secondary inspirations - CGI.Br Principles,
CoE principles, and G 8 principles....<br>
<br>
In these principles docs, while all f them orepeatedly and
emphatically speak of democracy, the MS (multistakeholder) term
either does not figure (CGI.Br doc) or comes in a much much
subsidiary fashion wrt to democracy (the other two docs)<br>
<br>
Now, lets see what does your contribution - developed by civil
society actors in IG space - come up with .....<br>
<br>
There is not a single mention of 'democracy' or 'democratic' in
this doc.... Even when you guys came up with "key governance
characteristics" you could think only of " openness,
transparency, inclusivity, accountability, and <i><b>equitable
multistakeholder participation </b></i>" (emphasis added)<br>
<br>
In all your f2f meetings, and long online deliberations, did the
word 'democracy' not occur to any one at all... Or did it occur
to someone and was contributed but did not find favour in the
group.... Dont know which is worse. But both are bad enough for
me to stay away from this doc. <br>
<br>
And I appeal also to others who really believe in democracy not
to get caught in this trap that is laid for them.... This is the
thin end of the wedge, which will soon usher you into a brave
new post democratic world, that one which the neo liberals dream
of.... It is a pity that a good part of civil society has agreed
to be the Trojan Horse for the powerful warriors of the neolib
order. <br>
<br>
See, how the term democracy is rejected, and phrases like
equitable multistakeholder participation (further explained in
the emerging contribution from 1 Net - principle 11 in the
survey) are getting introduced as basis of our governance. And
see how exactly it matches what some of us predicted is the
prime objective at present of the US supported status quoists to
get into the text of the outcomes from NetMundial...... All of
piece.<br>
<br>
parminder<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:53170F61.60305@itforchange.net"
type="cite">And this is not a petty point... Half of the time
of the WGEC got taken on this kind of discussion. This is the
single most important point today, if we can clarify nd
possibly agree on this point - rest is not too difficult...
Lets accept what is the key point, and not skirt it...<br>
<br>
BTW, the German government has the following to say in its
submission to NetMundial<br>
<br>
"Democratically elected governments, as the representative of
the people, possess public authority including
internet-related public policy issues and are supposed to be
the main source for legitimacy and democratic legitimation.
Hence they have to respect and protect human rights, ensure
that the rule of law is respected and that relevant national
legislation complies with their obligations under
international law. Moreover, they need to ensure that the
appropriate basic conditions both in terms of cyber-security
and technical provisions are in place. Civil society serves,
and should continue to do so, as a facilitator and notably as
a source of empowerment and credibility, especially at
community level. The private sector and particularly the
technical community significantly influence and encourage the
development, distribution and accessibility of the internet,
and should continue to do so. In order to fully live up to the
potentials for economic growth, innovation, freedom of
expression, access to information and ideas and democratic
participation in a knowledge society, all stakeholders
involved need to work together."<br>
<br>
Do you for instance agree to the above formulation, or NOT...<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2E3D5FD7-A108-4A16-977A-2650F624CA82@Malcolm.id.au"
type="cite">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div apple-content-edited="true">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal;
orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto;
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal;
orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows:
auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing:
normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space:
normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; word-wrap:
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant:
normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing:
normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2;
text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows:
2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width:
0px; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode:
space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant:
normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing:
normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2;
text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; word-wrap:
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate; color:
rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica;
font-style: normal; font-variant: normal;
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal;
line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align:
-webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; border-spacing:
0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">
<div style="font-size: 12px; text-align:
-webkit-auto; word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate;
border-spacing: 0px;">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div>--</div>
<div>Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com</div>
<div>Internet lawyer, ICT policy
advocate, geek</div>
<div>host -t NAPTR
5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://e164.org">e164.org</a>|awk
-F! '{print $3}'</div>
</div>
</span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
WARNING: This email has not been encrypted.
You are strongly recommended to enable
encryption at your end. For instructions, see
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://jere.my/l/pgp">http://jere.my/l/pgp</a>.</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:anriette@apc.org">anriette@apc.org</a>
executive director, association for progressive communications
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.apc.org">www.apc.org</a>
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>