<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16443"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff text=#333333>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=509081114-09052012><FONT color=#0000ff
face=Arial>In this context, I think that the IGC should be paying
extremely close attention to the <A
href="http://www.opengovpartnership.org/">Open Government
Partnership </A> which I pointed to earlier.
</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=509081114-09052012><FONT color=#0000ff
face=Arial></FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=509081114-09052012><FONT color=#0000ff
face=Arial>The OGP has a formal "<A
href="http://http://www.opengovpartnership.org/open-government-declaration">Declaration</A>"
(i.e. normative statement--"convention" if you will) to which Members need to
formally commit themeselves. The Partner country's membership in
the Partnership is initially accepted based on their adherence to the
Charter and whose on-going performance is equally assessed (includng by CS)
against their stated plan/committment concerning the implementation of the
forward looking provisions of the Charter.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012>Secondly, CS has a formally defined role as a
full-fledged "partner" in the Partnership with certain designated rights and
responsibilities including a co-Chairmanship of the overall
Partnership.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012>Although there are a number of elements still in the
process of being worked out (not the least of which is the structuring of CS
in the context of the OGP) to my mind this is a direction towards which
EC/IG should be moving, towards which CS should be pushing IG, and
which overall represents a potentially very positive post Atlantic Charter
direction for the overall evolution of CS and Global Governance in the Age of
the Internet.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012>Best,</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012>Mike </SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=509081114-09052012> </SPAN>-----Original
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org
[mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>parminder<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 09, 2012 6:41 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
governance@lists.igcaucus.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [governance] Stakeholder
Participation in the Enhanced Cooperation Meeting in
Geneva</FONT></FONT><BR><BR>On Tuesday 08 May 2012 08:40 PM, michael gurstein
wrote: </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:6D6899A1E5984901A2C7561B7A4649BD@UserVAIO type="cite"><PRE wrap="">It seems to me that the basic issues of Enhanced Cooperation from a CS perspective are twofold:
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE>We, as a set of civil society players, have tried to
present concrete possibilities for both, but with no engagement from the
larger CS involved with IG.<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:6D6899A1E5984901A2C7561B7A4649BD@UserVAIO type="cite"><PRE wrap=""> 1. what is the normative framework within which EC should take place--my strong suggestion would be that it is that of transparency, accountability, democracy and inclusiveness (and of course there is the WSIS declaration etc. to support this). And that this should be presented as a declaration and within a framing document.
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>A framework convention on the Internet was proposed,
but found no traction among the CS actors in IG. Yes, it needs to be informed
by the values that you mention.<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:6D6899A1E5984901A2C7561B7A4649BD@UserVAIO type="cite"><PRE wrap=""> 2. that having agreed on such a normative framework the question is what is the most appropriate institutional arrangement for achieving these within the context of Internet governance.
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>UN CIRP proposal has as multistakeholder a structure
as OECD's Internet policy making mechanism (which is the default global
Internet policy making system at present), plus seeking strong linkages with a
rather empowered multistakeholder IGF (India IGF proposal). If something
else/more is needed and possible that it must be spelt out.<BR><BR>Still, we
believe that even a CIRP kind of body should be an interim arrangement, doing
stop-gap work, but focussing on the activity of being the nodal point for
developing a suitable framework convention on the Internet, which 'framework
convention' then proposes the right body for global governance of the global
internet, which is fully adequate and appropriate to the phenomenon, context
etc.<BR><BR>If someone has a different/ better roadmap, lets discuss it.
<BR><BR>Non engagement with and non-proposal of clear concrete road-maps is
simply an acceptance of the status quo in global Internet governance, and we
think that the staus quo is hugely problematic, involves ever greater
concentration of power, and is thus not acceptable.<BR><BR>parminder <BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:6D6899A1E5984901A2C7561B7A4649BD@UserVAIO type="cite"><PRE wrap="">Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: <A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</A> [<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</A>] On Behalf Of Anriette Esterhuysen
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 1:08 AM
To: <A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</A>
Subject: Re: [governance] Stakeholder Participation in the Enhanced Cooperation Meeting in Geneva
Dear Bill, Adam and all
The agenda is very basic. I will post it below. Parminder and I have both been asked to speak. APC will post our basic input here as soon as we have had a chance to present it to members first.
Basically my idea is to shift the discussion towards the involvement of civil society in EC and rather than just the usual involvement of governments. My gut reaction to EC is that there is all this dispute about the involvements from States and while this is kind of going nowhere, there appears to be less cooperation and more concentration of power among large companies, rich country governments, and established IG 'institutions'.
I hope this will complement Parminder's input which I hope will focus on the imbalances in governmental involvement from governments in the north (who tend to say they don't want control, but they already have it) and governments in the south (who say they want more control and who don't have much at global level, and who are not demonstrating, consistently, good use of the control they do have at national level - in my view).
A serious discussion on what governments responsibilities are and of WHAT they need to be involved in would be useful in my view.
And then finally, and I would appreciate IGC input on this.. among APC staff we have had a discussion of the parameters of EC. Is EC just something we should be talking about at global level, or also at national level.
I feel stongly that we need to take the discussion to EC in IG at national level. And this should touch on global IG issues (how countries engage, whether there is capacity building, consultation, etc. around involvement in global issues/process) as well as on national IG issues.
Anriette
11:00-
13:00
Welcoming remarks by the Chair of the CSTD, Mr. Fortunato de la Peña ■ Address by: Dr. Hamadoun Touré, Secretary-General of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) ■ Address by: Mr. Nigel Hickson, Vice President for Europe, ICANN ■ Address by: Mr. Markus Kummer, Vice President Public Policy, Internet Society ■ Address by: Mr. Jimson Olufuye, Vice-Chairman, Africa Region, World Information Technology and Services Alliance ■ Address by: Mr. Parminder Singh, Executive Director, IT for Change ■ Address by: Ms. Marilyn Cade, CEO, mCADE LLC ■ Address by: Ms. Anriette Esterhuysen, Executive Director, Association for Progressive Communications
15:00-
18:00
General discussion
On 08/05/12 09:06, Adam Peake wrote:
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><PRE wrap="">Could you give a pointer to the agenda.
Thanks,
Adam
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:55 PM, William Drake <<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch">william.drake@uzh.ch</A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch"><mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch></A>> wrote:
Hi
Just wondering if we want to do anything about this? The draft
program has a couple of IGCers as speakers but no clarity on rules
of engagement for other attendees…?
Best,
Bill
On Apr 18, 2012, at 11:05 AM, William Drake wrote:
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><PRE wrap=""> Hello,
As you know, there will be an enhanced cooperation consultation on
18 May in Geneva, following the IGF consultations and MAG
meeting. <A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://archive.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=6227&lang=1">http://archive.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=6227&lang=1</A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href="http://archive.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=6227&lang=1"><http://archive.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=6227&lang=1></A>
It would be very important that all stakeholders are able to
intervene and contribute freely (but strategically) during this
consultation, rather than have to sit silently on the sidelines or
be relegated to collective brief interventions at the end of each
session. I imagine that ICC (business) and ISOC (TC) will be
contacting the CSTD secretariat to make such a request. On behalf
of civil society, the IGC should do the same.
Assuming people agree with the proposition, may I suggest that the
co-coordinators take a crack at drafting a one or two paragraph
letter to Mongi to this effect? Probably it would be better to do
it sooner than later, as the secretariat would then need to pass
the request along to governments etc…
Best,
Bill
***************************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
University of Zurich, Switzerland
<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch">william.drake@uzh.ch</A> <A class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href="mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch"><mailto:william.drake@uzh.ch></A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="http://www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake">www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake</A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href="http://www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake"><http://www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake></A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="http://www.williamdrake.org">www.williamdrake.org</A> <A class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href="http://www.williamdrake.org"><http://www.williamdrake.org></A>
****************************************************
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=""> ____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</A> <A class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"><mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org></A>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</A>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</A>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</A>
Translate this email: <A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</A>
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=""> </PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>