<p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US">Hello Wolfgang,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US">Thanks for sharing this relevant reference. You provided very
interesting insights and you bring back to our memories important chapters of
the IG novel. However, there are few points in which I don't totally agree with you and I would like to express my thoughts.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US">The conclusion of your article would lead us to understand that the
scenario we live today comes down to:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; ">Regulation through softlaw, in a multistakeholder fashion, fostered by
the initiatives from developed countries you mentioned<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">versus</i>
Regulation through treaties, in an intergovernmental fashion, fostered by developing
countries.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US">But, in real life, there are much more options in between. Despite the
fact soft law is a valuable approach to many issues, it is not an adequate way
to address all public policy issues. Treaties and soft law should be complementary
mechanisms in international relations, and both can be very important, if used
wisely and appropriately.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US">Secondly, you do not talk about the “quality” of the multistakeholder
participation. </span><span style="font-family:Arial">The principle of
multi-stakeholder participation is not a procedural idea devoid of content</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:
PT-BR">Its political strength and legitimacy comes from including a diversity
of voices that have a stake in the process and would be excluded otherwise. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Currently, multistakeholder participation has
not equally included all stakeholders (see for instance my last e-mail about
the barriers for CS participation in CSTD, if compared to other stakeholders),
and it has not equally included non-governmental representatives from developed
and developing countries. One just needs to take a look at the composition of
the CSTD WG on IGF improvements to have an idea of how great the unbalance
is.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>So, unless something is said about
the “quality” of multistakeholder participation, I find it inappropriate for CS
to endorse a blank check.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Lastly, I think it is politically wrong to
establish a division between developed countries X developing countries, when
it comes to issue of multistakeholder participation, enhanced cooperation or
even their inclination to be constructive.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">There are cleavages between developed
countries (eg. Is Sarkozy’s France and Berlusconi’s Italy equal to Germany and
Switzerland?). And there are cleavages between developing countries as well. Brazil
and India are certainly not equal to China and Saudi Arabia, as you implied. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Maybe it is useful to remember that Brazil
was one of the first to propose a debate about principles in IGF, it has
created a multistakeholder body coordinate internet governance in Brazil, it
has developed a bottom-up regulation for the internet with multistakeholder
participation (Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet), and it has
been the only country to stand up for more CS participation on CSTD in May to
redress the current unequal conditions if compared to other stakeholders. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">Maybe it is useful to remember that India was
one of the most proactive countries in the CSTD WG and have advanced several
concrete suggestions for IGF improvement, including strengthening CS
participation on the MAG.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">And maybe it is useful to remember that US
was firstly against the continuation of the working group on IGF improvement,
as per their <a href="http://www.unctad.org/sections/un_cstd/docs//UN_WGIGF2011d09_usa_en.pdf">letter
of April 2011</a>, an important political fact not mentioned in your article.
They only changed their position on the last days of CSTD, because they were
not joined by the Europeans. I think we all know that the absence of improvement threatens the existence of the IGF as a relevant body.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US">Just a few initial points. I hope we can continue the debate further.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US">Best wishes,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US">Marília </span></p>
<p></p>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">2011/7/31 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de">wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">FYI<br>
<br>
<a href="http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/07/27/internet-principle-hype" target="_blank">http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/07/27/internet-principle-hype</a> <<a href="http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/07/27/internet-principle-hype" target="_blank">http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/07/27/internet-principle-hype</a>><br>
<br>
wolfgang<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, visit:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other 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>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade<br>FGV Direito Rio<br><br>Center for Technology and Society<br>Getulio Vargas Foundation<br>Rio de Janeiro - Brazil<br>