<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=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<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>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Arial Narrow";
panose-1:2 11 5 6 2 2 2 3 2 4;}
/* 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:"Times New Roman";
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Hi All<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Since McTim and Robert Guerra have raised questions about the validity
and legitimacy of the process by which the second statement (mostly on process)
was read at the IGF consultations on the behalf of IGC, I have the following explanation
to offer.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>First of all, I don’t think this is the first time that a statement
has been hurriedly prepared during or on the eve of a meeting and presented on
the behalf of the IGC. I wonder if the two contesting parties in the present
instance too have been a part of such an exercise at some time. In this context
it is important to note that these statements on most of these earlier occasions
were made without any legal basis, while the one made in <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Geneva</st1:place></st1:City> had a statutory basis in the relevant
parts of the IGC charter quoted earlier by Avri and others. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Now the question is whether it adhered to the relevant provisions of the
charter. I will describe the sequence of events for members to make their
judgment. On 21<sup>st</sup> Adam noted in an email to the list that we are
missing the opportunity to comment on process issues, and that he had expected
me to prepare a statement. Bill wondered in response to Adam’s email if
there was any time at all to prepare a statement at that point. Avri in
response quoted the charter provisions with the opinion that these could still
be used for a statement. Bill then wrote asking me if I could still draft a statement
as per provisions etc. I replied to the original email of Adam’s that I hadn’t
prepared a second statement on ‘process’ (apart form the one on 4
themes which was already adopted) because of certain apprehensions that some process
issues were connected to some tacit understandings when the substantive main
themes related statement was agreed to, and I was unsure about possibility of
caucus’s consensus on some important process issues (see my email dt 22nd).
However, I said I will put together some points on process which, to quote my
email, ‘</span></font><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>in my understanding seem to have wide acceptance in
the caucus’ </span></font>and present it to the evening CS plenary and the
next morning IGC meeting for reactions. (One must note that in the second ‘process’
statement there were really none of any ‘pet’ issues that I may
been pushing for in my individual capacity, and therefore there could have been
no great personal interest in my pushing this statement. I was only doing my
co-coordinator duty on the requests by caucus members that a ‘process’
statement too should be attempted.)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Robert, you have said in your email dt 23<sup>rd</sup> that if only we
would have at least checked online, at least you and others who are often/
mostly online could have responded. But then all the above exchanges on the IGC
list about attempting a quick statement on behalf of the IGC took place 2 full
days prior to the statement being prepared, and if you indeed were against such
last minute preparation of any statement as a valid and legitimate ‘process’
(and not necessarily with reference to its substantive content) as McTim’s
and your objection seem to be about, my simple question to you is, why didnt you
come in on 21<sup>st</sup> and 22<sup>nd</sup> to the list and object to the
process of attempting any such statement.. As per your convictions stated now,
you should at that point have said, no, this is not a proper process in your
view….. Why come in with your views post facto, when the ‘event’
and the exchanges took place in your full view over two full days? I really
hope you will answer this simple question. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Back to the process of adoption of our statement, after the above
exchange on the IGC list, we presented the issue of making a statement at the CS
plenary on the evening of 22<sup>nd</sup> , which is in accordance
with our mission statement in our charter ‘….to provide a mechanism
for coordination of advocacy to enhance the utilization and influence of Civil
Society (CS) and the IGC in relevant policy processes</span>’ and
objective 4 ‘Provide outreach to other CS groups who have an interest or
a stake in some aspect of Internet governance polices’. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>It is at that meeting that the suggestion for including Human Rights as
a cross-cutting theme for the IGF-2 came from Robin Gross (a caucus member),
and there was general agreement for it. (this is the only substantive issue
that McTim, on a specific inquiry from Bill, was able to point as something he
objected to in our statement). After this meeting, I reached my hotel room very
late, and only on the early morning of 23<sup>rd</sup>, the day of IGF consultations
could I prepare a draft statement, drawing on the approved Feb statement,
adding a point or two which in my understanding represented ‘assumed general
thinking of the caucus’ (IGC charter), including the point of HR as a
cross cutting theme. In this matter, apart from the fact pointed out by Bill
that we have always endorsed HR as a key issues and principle, it may be noted
that our vision statement mentions ‘the realization of internationally
agreed human rights</span>’ right at the start. I posted the draft at 830
AM Geneva time on the IGC list. As per point 5 of the section on statements during
meeting in our charter, an important criterion for such statements is that they
reflect vision, objectives etc as per our charter. Here we had a direct
copy-paste from the first line of our vision statement. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>The statement was read out to the 17 members present in the morning IGC
meeting, and those present were asked not only to give their view on the
content of the statement, <b><span style='font-weight:bold'>but also, whether the
statement in their opinion represented the ‘assumed general thinking of
the caucus</span>’ as per point 2 and 5 of the section</span></b> on statements
at meeting of the charter. And there was a general agreement that it did. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>So,McTim, you are wrong when you say per your email dt 23<sup>rd</sup>
that<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in;text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>“</span></font><font
size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>I
also don't think it passes criteria #2, if it did, we would have explicitly
mentioned/included it in our statement.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Of course, the statement itself is for external consumption that it
will be stupid to include these kinds of internal issues in the statement
itself. However, when I put the draft on the IGC list on 23<sup>rd</sup> morning
before the meeting, I did say that <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in;text-autospace:none'><font size=2
face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>“If
there is a good amount of consensus among those present, <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>with a shared acceptance that this draft reflects
positions that are generally understood to have been accepted/ endorsed by the
caucus</span></b> (emphasis added now), it will form a spoken input into the
consultation on the behalf of the IG caucus.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>So, point 2 of the referred section of the charter was always on our
mind, and we made sure it passed that criterion – both subjectively, as
well as with reference to the view of all those present. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>I will be happy to provide any other clarification if necessary. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Parminder <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=gray face="Arial Narrow"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Narrow";color:gray'>________________________________________________</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=gray face="Arial Narrow"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Narrow";color:gray'>Parminder Jeet
Singh</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=gray face="Arial Narrow"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Narrow";color:gray'>IT for Change, <st1:City
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Bangalore</st1:place></st1:City></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><em><i><font size=2 color=gray face="Arial Narrow"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Narrow";color:gray'>Bridging
Development Realities and Technological Possibilities</span></font></i></em><font
size=2 color=gray face="Arial Narrow"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Arial Narrow";color:gray'> </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=gray face="Arial Narrow"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Narrow";color:gray'>Tel: (+91-80)
2665 4134, 2653 6890</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=gray face="Arial Narrow"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Narrow";color:gray'>Fax: (+91-80)
4146 1055<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><a href="http://www.itforchange.net/"
title="http://www.itforchange.net/"><em><i><font size=2 color=black face=Arial
title="http://www.itforchange.net/"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
Arial;color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>www.ITforChange.net</span></font></i></em></a></span></font><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>