Parminder, what you have shared is very close to how other IG activists and advocacy groups fell and have been concerned with for quite some time now. I have also observed some people on the MAG committee to have risen from their CS role stepping into the ICANN process and leading towards functioning more towards ICANN's interests and failing out on the objectives of the CS group. As stated earlier somewhere, I have had concerns on how thing shave been moving forward and the same individuals changing their IGF hats to ICANN hats and vice versa. There is definitely a great need to introduce more CS reps in the process that have experience and knowledge of ICANN and then create that tunnel to decentralizing the issue that has been in discussion for over half a decade now. There is a lot to done but somehow no one seems to be paying attention to the issue and you have been the first one to step into open opposition and others need to realize this that they must also be vocal about their concerns.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Dear Jean-Louis<br>
<br>
We are glad for your and CSPDTT's support. Thank you very much.
Parminder<br>
<br>
Dear All<br>
<br>
There is of course a very strong 'development constituency' that is of
this view, as presented d below. Almost all people and organizations
working in the development area that we know and work with will
have a position close to this. However, much effort is made to
blind-side this view, behave as if it is not there, or is only held by
a small fringe. If a more open forum like IGF does show some promise to
give space to these views, it is constantly run down. <br>
<br>
My problems with organized business interests heavy governance
structures in ICANN can relatively easily be understood in the
background of the current clamour, nay belatedly the accepted
collective wisdom, for new global regulatory structures for global
finance. What about the following governance structure for regulating
global finance, which I build following the ICANN/ GNSO model.
Incidentally, this model is the current improved one which we are
supposed to be happy about.<br>
<br>
A global policy council with 25 % votes for the banks, 25% for other
financial institutions, 25% for large commercial account holders and 25
% for saving account holders, nothing to anyone with no bank account -
which is still the large majority of the world's disadvantaged people
(how banking works is supposed to be none of their business)<br>
<br>
Why dont we - of the world of innovative governance models in the
information society - propose the above to the G-20 meeting on the
current economic crisis, and then celebrate if this proposal is
accepted as a great multistakeholder governance innovation, that frees
the world from statist controls and provides brave new directions.<br>
<br>
(Disclaimer: I greatly respect all progressive people and organizations
wherever, putting in their effort in whichever way they think best. The
above caricature of ICANN like processes is just to make the point of
its inherent dangers, even absurdity, to the extent they seek to deal
with any really crucial global political issue at all.)<br><font color="#888888">
<br>
Parminder <br>
<br>
</font></font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
jlfullsack wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Dear Parminder</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">I thank you warmly for having
expressed the very concerns (and even the fear) of most of the
grass-root CS organisations that are implied in the WSIS follow-up
process. </font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Personnally and on behalf of
CSDPTT I am pleased to share with you the prevalence of public interest
and the permanent worry about real development : these should be the
major drivers in all our activities and commitments, and -in this case-
in Internet governance issues which will have an important -either
positive or negative- impact in developing countries.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Friendy yours</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Jean-Louis Fullsack</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div>----- Original Message ----- </div>
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0);padding-right:0px;padding-left:5px;margin-left:5px;margin-right:0px">
<div style="background:rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0%;font-family:arial;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:10pt;line-height:normal;font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal">
<b>From:</b>
<a title="parminder@itforchange.net" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">Parminder</a> </div>
<div style="font-family:arial;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:10pt;line-height:normal;font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal"><b>To:</b>
<a title="governance@lists.cpsr.org" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>
; <a title="mueller@syr.edu" href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu" target="_blank">Milton L Mueller</a> </div>
<div style="font-family:arial;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:10pt;line-height:normal;font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal"><b>Sent:</b>
Wednesday, April 01, 2009 6:48 AM</div>
<div style="font-family:arial;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:10pt;line-height:normal;font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal"><b>Subject:</b>
Re: [governance] Proposed text for a sign-on or IGC statement re:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Robin and Milton,<br>
<br>
IT for Change will sign on the text put up by Milton, and I as a member
of IGC also support that IGC signs it. <br>
<br>
I must however mention a couple of issues, on behalf of my
organization, which do not impact the above endorsement. I apologize
for this longish text, but we have reservations about the ICANN's
governance model and we need to mention them while supporting an
endorsement of a relatively minor structural change in it. It is also
relevant to mention these issues in some detail because of the
surprise, and perhaps exasperation (I dont say that it is not
justified), shown by some members on this list as to why do some
members active in IGC/ IGF not engage sufficiently with ICANN where
some 'real work' may be getting done. <br>
<br>
This is how we see this space, and decide on our engagements, thinly
resourced that we are.<br>
<br>
Either ICANN, and its GNSO, is merely doing 'relatively' mundane,
though often important, administrative tasks in managing some critical
Internet resources, meaning tasks that do not have much political
implication, or ICANN indeed does tasks with significant political
implications. In case its is the former, we are not really that
interested in its work. Perhaps that may appear a little rude. Better
to say we do not have the time vis a vis our primary inclinations as an
organization. We primarily do development work, with a keen
understanding of the political nature of development. In this context,
we consider it our task to specifically represent the the interests of
the currently disadvantaged and marginalized sections.Technical
governance is not our core mandate; only to the extent it has strong
political implications vis a vis 'development constituencies' do we get
involved. <br>
<br>
However, in case ICANN/ GNSO does work with important political
implications we simply do not agree with much of its constitutive logic
- for instance, of equality/</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">balance</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> between demand and supply side
of the 'domain name' marketplace, or even between other commercial and
non-commercial parties. We also do not agree to its basic criterion for
legitimate interest/ representation that requires one to at least be a
domain registrant. We do not think that is the point - for instance
even in the KTCN campaign of NCUC on the FoE issue. <br>
<br>
Such 'user' based and stakeholder based global governance systems
disproportionately favoring organized private sector (US-ians may read,
business sector) - to counter whose power is a central governance issue
at the global level - are exactly the wrong models of global governance
to promote. Such models are poised to </font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">overall </font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">do much greater damage than good
to the global public interest. They are especially dangerous when they
seek political sovereignty, which we are afraid much of these minor
structural adjustments are aimed at consolidating. </font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">To the extent that </font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">there is a certain complicity in
the ICANN arena i</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">n
this regard</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> -
including of some of the involved civil society actors - we</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> must strongly disassociate
ourselves from supporting any such implications of the present, or any
other, proposal for structural changes in the ICANN.<br>
<br>
On the other hand, we can understand and accept user/ stakeholder
models for relatively low-level technical policy tasks, which are
politically accountable to globally legitimate entities (sorry, but US
government is not). We also agree that a simple inter-governmental
system is not enough to constitute such an 'legitimate entity' as
representing global public interest, especially in the new global
circumstances created by the Internet. New, and perhaps innovative,
ways to construct the needed legitimacies must therefore be tried out.
Such efforts should however remain rooted in key percepts of what is
public interest, and what can constitute its legitimate representation.
The separation between private interest and public interest needs to be
maintained, indeed honored. There should be sufficient proactive effort
towards disproportionately higher representation of those currently
marginalized, and not the opposite as these new models of governance
do, in the name of some kind of neat efficiency and the like. All
such governance innovations - out-of-the-box, subversive, whatever -
that look like they are especially pushing forward marginalized
interests attract our strong interest. All 'innovations' that further
entrench dominant interests -whether economic, political,
geo-political, class - are correspondingly received with strong
political opposition. <br>
<br>
Warding off illegitimate statist interests has been a chief, at one
stage even the central, struggle in the IG arena. Many actors who have
shown exemplary dedication as well as foresight in fighting these
interests, with a good degree of success, must forever remain our
heroes. However, some of the same actors, and/or their second
generation flag-bearers, are much less cognizant of another struggle in
the IG arena which is at least as important. The struggle to make sure
that the Internet does not become an instrument of a new global order
that it even further dominated by the already powerful; where
political power is allocated on the basis on the economic power one
already posses, instead of moderating it, and where new governance
systems provide political cover and legitimacy to economic
exploitation. It is no longer acceptable for any civil society
constituency claiming any degree of global legitimacy to not represent
both these struggles equally. We not only find the global governance
models implied in the ICANN system quite </font><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New Roman'" lang="EN-GB">ominous
for the future of global governance, we would also like the global
civil society engaged with its forums to better represent the political
interests of the currently excluded/ marginalized sections.</span><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"><br>
However, we do recognize that the battle has to be fought on many
fronts, and many in the NCUC have done great work in developing more
spaces for public interest constituencies, and taking up some important
public interest issues. <br>
<br>
We will like to see the NCSG 6.0 charter developed by the NCUC adopted
by the ICANN instead of the alternative one, and especially agree that
its direct instead of constituency based election of council members
is a much better process. It is better because it has a higher chance
of representing global public interest, each candidate having to muster
a much wider support. <br>
<br>
Parminder</font><br>
<br>
Milton L Mueller wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">The organizations and
individuals listed below are members of and participants in the civil
society Internet Governance Caucus. We wish to express our support for
version 6.0 of the Noncommercial Stakeholders Group (NCSG) charter
developed by the Noncommercial Users Constituency. While there may
still be room for minor improvements, we believe that the basic
principles on which the charter is founded provide the fairest and most
effective basis for civil society representation in ICANN’s Generic
Names Supporting Organization. </span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">We specifically support
the proposal because:</span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"> * It was developed
transparently and with many opportunities for input by relevant ICANN
participants;</span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"> * It makes it easy to
form constituencies or affinity groups, but avoids fragmentation of
noncommercial stakeholders into independent constituencies with
separate mailing lists, administrative structures and representatives; </span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"> * It permits individual
membership in the NCSG and does not require individuals to fit
themselves into arbitrarily-defined categories that may not correspond
to their interests and needs;</span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"> * It fosters
representation of minority viewpoints in consensus-based Working
Groups, but does not rigidly assign votes to small factions, instead
offering them a chance to build consensus</span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">We also note that the
alternative charter proposal seems designed to give a specific faction
guaranteed Council seats and does not foster global, geographically
diverse representation. </span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">We appreciate ICANN’s
effort to make its GNSO more representative and urge you to ratify and
accept the NCSG charter.</span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">Signed,</span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">--</span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">--</span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">Etc.</span></font></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<hr> ____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" target="_blank">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div></div></div>
<br>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><br>Regards.<br>--------------------------<br>Fouad Bajwa<br>@skBajwa <br>Answering all your technology questions<br><a href="http://www.askbajwa.com">http://www.askbajwa.com</a><br>
<a href="http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa">http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa</a><br><br>