<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="country-region" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:555509063;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1628211468 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Dear all, <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>I have serious issues with the proposed text on oversight
functions.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>I think a lot of discussion is taking place on minor issues,
without clearly developing positions on the main issue. And I list them as
following. If we have some agreement on these, it is worthwhile to discuss
greater details of this text. It may be that some others are proceeding with
some implied understanding and consensus on these issues, if so, I request those
premises be stated upfront.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1>
<li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Does IG imply important public
policy functions at all or not? – I understand that it is accepted,
in principle, that it does. <o:p></o:p></span></font></li>
<li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>What are legitimate public
policy making – or political – bodies that can be considered
for political oversight of Internet <o:p></o:p></span></font></li>
<li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Can ICANN itself be considered
such a public policy making – and therefore political – body. <o:p></o:p></span></font></li>
</ol>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>The draft text seems to be informed by a thinking which will
reply ‘yes’ to point 3. The position that is being proposed is that
the public policy functions now with the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> government be taken from it, and
then ICANN becomes the global public policy making body for all functions of IG
without any external political oversight. (I cannot consider administrative
arrangements of appeals etc as political oversight mechanisms)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>This is completely unacceptable, and flies in the face of
earlier agreed WSIS docs (<st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Geneva</st1:place></st1:City>
phase) as well as the WGIG report. Both of these clearly mentioned that public
policy is a governmental function. (I wonder what do the WGIG members in the IG
caucus have to say to this – though not at all meaning that WGIG report
can be considered a consensus report). Why such basic issues are being
completely bypassed – and even a discussion on these not taking place? <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>And why are there opening lines like ‘</span></font><font
size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>the
time has come for a change in the political oversight of the Internet’
mentioned ( 64 C of the proposed text) and then we find that the text does not
deal with any political oversight at all. All it speaks of is exhortation to
ICANN to develop proper policy development processes. Where is the political
element in this?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Why are we confusing basic management, governance and
political issues? If the drafters do not believe in political oversight –
let them say it so clearly, rather than put administrative processes in the
paras which carry the heading ‘political oversight’. (There
is no intent to be aggressive here.. in my opinion, the basic point is in this
distinction.)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>There seems to be some romanticism in some parts of the CS that
real global governance decisions should actually be taken by bodies where civil
society representatives sit as voting members. This is absurd. CS has to have
greater and greater interfaces with global (and national) governance systems in
a way that it can advise, input proposals, extract accountablity etc, but to
think that we should actually take up decision making responsibilities is
politically naïve, and raises questions about our legitimacy. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>It seems that as CS, there is an agreed implication that we
should always be pushing for more and more ‘powers’ for the CS. I
clearly disassociate from this view. Such a view in fact is very dangerous
– and it is often because of such views that CS finds opposition even to
its due place in the roles that are appropriate for it. I mean, are there any core
governance functions in any democracy, however imperfect it may be, that any of
us will want our governments to get off from, and have some CS
‘representatives’ take up those roles – and replace
democratic processes by processes of nomination? Who would these
representatives be – ‘you’ and ‘me’, on this list
?? That would be some oligarchy in the making… <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>I shouldn’t be discussing these simple issues
– but the oversight positions in this draft are so politically untenable,
that I need to. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>So, please lets get real, and ask for political
oversight to go from US to an appropriate inter-governmental system, –
and that this be a new body since IG functions are in many way unique
etc……….. (we can work to develop the language here) –
and it should have appropriate etc (….you can put conditions here) role
of CS and interface with CS …………….<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>And once this is accepted, everything that is written
in the proposed draft about internal reforms in ICANN is very valid – I
am solidly behind all the language in there. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>But what the present draft does is to conflate
political oversight functions with resource allocation management and technical
functions, in a very dangerous way (and with this also completely defeats the
crux of the WGIG report). (Will the drafters of the present text also state
upfront that the present text is in complete disagreement with almost the whole
of WGIG report on this issue?) and after conflation of all IG functions, it
hands over all these functions and powers to the ICANN. That’s all that
the draft position essentially does. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>I cannot accept the
present draft to go as the position of the IG caucus. It represents too
un-representative a view.</span></font></b><font size=2 face=Arial><span
lang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> Those who agree on
it should submit the position in individual names. (I apologise for such ‘aggression’
once again – but advocacy often calls forth such qualities) <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>And there are many other political issues with the
draft, that can be brushed aside as minor one. I give one example….<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>As spoken of in my earlier mails the references of
accountability to global internet user community (as spoken of in the daft
text) is not sufficient, the world community, every single person, is affected
by the Internet, positively or negatively, and those on the wrong side of the
digital divide are as much the stakeholders in IG as those with 24 hour
connectivity. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Parminder <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>