<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [governance] main themes</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>On 2/21/08 12:11 PM, "Parminder" <parminder@itforchange.net> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#00007F"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>Bill<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#00007F"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>Would it not be better to use ‘Swiss gov’ instead of </SPAN></FONT></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>Swiss OfCom in the theme proposals. Makes it weightier and also more accessible to everyone. Parminder <BR>
<BR>
---------<BR>
<BR>
Good point. Because it was OfCom specifically that offered to co-sponsor the DA workshop in Rio (just like other ministries that have done so in their own names for other workshops) and the new statement is signed by OfCom I didn’t differentiate, but in fact the statement is labeled “Swiss Comments” so presumably it’s ok to attribute it to the Swiss government generally. Also, in rushing out a text, I failed to note also the co-sponsorship of the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee; since the Brazilian government has publicly supported the DA idea (not just in Rio, but also in responding to a talk I gave at an UNCTAD meeting in Geneva) it would be dumb not to flag their support and invite their comment on the proposal. So how about we consider the revised texts below. Corrected a typo as well.<BR>
<BR>
BD<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><B>4. A Development Agenda for Internet Governance<BR>
</B><BR>
Development is a key focus of the Tunis Agenda and its mandate for the IGF. Development also was listed as a cross-cutting theme of the Athens and Rio conferences, but neither featured a main session that devoted significant, focused attention to the linkages between Internet governance mechanisms and development. However, at Rio a workshop was organized by civil society actors in collaboration with the Swiss Office of Communications, the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee, and partners from other stakeholder groups on, “Toward a Development Agenda for Internet Governance.” The workshop considered the options for establishing a holistic program of analysis and action that would help mainstream development considerations into Internet governance decision making processes. Attendees at this workshop expressed strong interest in further work on the topic being pursued in the IGF. Hence, we believe the Development Agenda concept should be taken up in a main session at New Delhi, and that this would be of keen interest to a great many participants there. We also support the Swiss proposal to consider establishing a multi-stakeholder Working Group that could develop recommendations to the IGF on a development agenda.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<B>5. Transparency and Inclusive Participation in Internet Governance<BR>
</B><BR>
The WSIS principles hold that Internet governance processes “should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations.” Governments invoked these principles throughout the WSIS process, and in the Tunis Agenda mandated the IGF to, “promote and assess, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet Governance processes.” Nevertheless, the IGF has not held any follow-up discussion on how to pursue this key element of its mandate. The Internet Governance Caucus has consistently programmatic activity in this arena, and hence welcomes the Swiss statement that implementation of the WSIS principles should be added as a cross-cutting issue at the core of all IGF discussions. To help kick-start that cross-cutting consideration, we propose that a main session in New Delhi concentrate on two WSIS principles of general applicability for which progress in implementation can be most readily assessed: transparency, and inclusive participation. The session could consider patterns of practice across Internet governance mechanisms, and identify generalizable lessons concerning good or best practices.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>