This link: <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/10/us-cambodia-genocide-idUSTRE7994H620111010">http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/10/us-cambodia-genocide-idUSTRE7994H620111010</a><div><br></div><div>also in a way illustrates the point that I was trying to make about the diversity of jurisprudence.</div>
<div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com">salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div>Hi Marilia,</div><div><br></div><div>This was very interesting reading and I would just like to make a few observations. </div>
<div><br></div><div>On page 4 of your paper, you highlight that the definition of Internet Governance (as per WGIG 2005 Report) sets the parameters for how people are to engage in internet governance and I think you used" how actors are to engage in internet governance". You mention that it all actors have equal importance and you mention that participation of non-state actors should not take place on an <i>ad hoc</i> basis, depending upon invitation or depending on the subject, as commonly happens in the discussion of other international issues. You also pointed to the final documents in both cases of the WSIS did not specify their roles and responsibilities in internet governance. I like how you talked about the strengths and weaknesses of that. I would like to add on to the strengths of it not specifying the roles and responsibilities. I think it is important that it is not prescribed.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Even without the WGIG defining internet governance, the reality is states or governments are mandated by the people (in countries that have elections - social contract #referendum #voting ) to govern, the private sector often called the engines and drivers of national economy are called to operate their businesses. Civil society (in countries that encourage the presence of civil society, there are jurisdictions who struggle to be heard eg. Iran, Yemen, Fiji etc) have a role to act as watchdogs and to look out for the interests of the marginalised.</div>
<div><br></div><div>How government functions in Iran is different from how government functions in Australia etc. Similarly, civil society in South Africa will be different from civil society in Nauru. There are different contexts and the plurality of jurisprudence is clear. Similarly private sector in Spain is different from private sector in the Pacific. Behind the "seen" or visible realms and the reasons for this are varied and it could include things like approaches to "regulations" by the state, political will etc. Things like universal service and access, there are diverse views on how to better give access to the underserved, some say that there should be things like Universal Service Obligations (USOs) and some believe that is archaic but that effective competition is far better able to sustainably allow underserved communities to have better access. The beauty about IGF is that it allows everyone to come equally to the table without having their role defined to discuss on an equal footing lessons and challenges to enable each other to develop and leapfrog.</div>
<div><br></div><div>This was why it was interesting to see "VIP" badges at the IGF. One transcendent thing about the Internet is the manner in which it is equalising and democratising power, in terms of the "user perspective) for example you have Parliamentarians in Europe who are conscious about how they behave. There are still jurisdictions in the world where authority figures do not want to be "transparent". I had mentioned that governments all over the world behave differently not only because they are in different geographical locations, but have different contexts and subject to different jurisprudence which causes them to behave differently and as such laws and regulations, norms are different. It is kind of like where you can expect skimpy dressing in Bondi and for someone to be covered up in Afghanistan. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Similarly countries differ in how they view privacy and censorship because governments behave differently. The danger of defining the roles and responsibilities of actors in internet governance is that in our attempt for efficiency, we then endanger vulnerable groups. Imagine civil society in a country where free speech is codified to be allowed and permitted but on the ground is treated as sedition. The IGF like a market is able to set its own tempo without being regulated. The danger of regulating the market or the IGF is that there will be conflicting applications. Governments already regulate ISPs in their countries and set rules for competition and drive policy. We already have the ITU, WTO, WIPO that looks after ICT and work towards to improving policy and building capacity. Remember we have some intergovernmental institutions that are on record for having views that the internet should be patented, see: <a href="http://boingboing.net/2011/10/08/wipo-boss-the-web-would-have-been-better-if-it-was-patented-and-its-users-had-to-pay-license-fees.html" target="_blank">http://boingboing.net/2011/10/08/wipo-boss-the-web-would-have-been-better-if-it-was-patented-and-its-users-had-to-pay-license-fees.html</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>There are developing countries whose governments do not believe that the private sector nor civil society should be consulted when making policy and decisions. Would defining their roles and responsibilities create any impact in the domestic context. From my observations, at least in my part of the world, it would not. What is needed is the creation of a safe place where people can dialogue where Governments can come in time to learn and see/witness the tangible benefits of a multi-stakeholder dialogue and discussion that is not regulated nor prescribed.</div>
<div><br></div><div>To seek to have the IGF to be absorbed into the multilateral framework is to seek to have ITU to absorb the IGF. Would it not be better that we retained the IGF multistakeholder process independent and open and lobby to have the ITU be more inclusive of involving others into their working groups other than the current paying members which are largely governments and corporations that can afford the levies. </div>
<div><br></div><div>In terms of increasing participation and meaningful participation, there are people who are doing what they can to increase participation and educate their regions on internet governance and whilst the pace seems slow there is powerful collaboration between actors and industries as they gather to work together. To increase participation, we have to work together with the IG Secretariat and stakeholders and map out ways to increase and strengthen participation but in my mind, the absorption into the UN system is not the answer.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I think we should ask people what they want to see before we dialogue on methodology that way the discussion on methodology can be fruitful. </div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div><br></div><div><br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div></div><div class="h5">On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Marilia Maciel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mariliamaciel@gmail.com" target="_blank">mariliamaciel@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
</div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div></div><div class="h5">
Dear all, <br><div class="gmail_quote"><br>We would like to share with you the paper <font size="2">"Multi-stakeholder
participation on internet governance: An analysis from a developing
country, civil society perspective", written by myself and Carlos
Affonso, from the Center for Technology and Society of Getulio Vargas
Foundation - Brazil, available from:<br>
<a href="http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/issue/governance/multi-stakeholder-participation-internet-governanc" target="_blank">http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/issue/governance/multi-stakeholder-participation-internet-governanc</a><br>
</font><font size="2"><br>This paper is part of APC´s Network of networks
initiative. We would like to thank very much APC, specially Valeria
Betancourt and Pablo Accousto, for the support and patience. </font><br><br><font size="2">Any comments or suggestions are very much welcome.<br><br>Best wishes,<br clear="all"></font>Marília and Carlos Affonso <br><font color="#888888"><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>
</font></div><font color="#888888"><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>
</font><br></div></div>____________________________________________________________<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, 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>
<br></blockquote></div><font color="#888888"><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div>Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala</div><div><br></div><div>Tweeter: @SalanietaT</div><div>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro</div>
<div>Cell: <a href="tel:%2B679%20998%202851" value="+6799982851" target="_blank">+679 998 2851</a></div>
<div> </div><div><br></div><br>
</font></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div>Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala</div><div><br></div><div>Tweeter: @SalanietaT</div><div>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro</div><div>Cell: +679 998 2851</div>
<div> </div><div><br></div><br>
</div>