<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">Thanks Norbert<br>
<br>
I did not oppose the call, but now that it is over, I must restate
the reason that I have this particular issue with the statement,
which I partly co-initiated.<br>
<br>
<br>
I think that when a drafter introduces a language like 'should
extend to broader sphere' , on being asked to clarify. those who
are for that language must clarify what is meant. This did not
happen.<br>
<br>
I was stuck by some people actually opposing Marco Civil process,
just because it is a parliamentary democratic process. They
withdrew this opposition when the phrase on 'CGI's remit should be
extended to broader spheres' was reintroduced. That for me formed
the background of the 'should extend to broader spheres' phrase.
<br>
<br>
It is like this. If someone wants me to sign on a statement for
strenghtening the judiciary in India, I will sign it. But if it
pointedly says, judiciary's role and remit should extend 'to
broader spheres' no serious political, democratic, civil society
group in India will sign it. They would like to know what exactly
is meant here. For instance, we wont have the judiciary second
guessing core policy issues, appointing the prime minister,
unilaterally impeaching members of parliament and so on.....
Clarity and separation of roles of different institutions is basic
to democracy....<br>
<br>
But I see here a version of multistakeholderism, which has
un-reined belief in a mutistakeholder body doing anything and
everything, and correspondingly no belef at all in represenative
structures. This is outstandingly dangerous. Lets not for some
small gains fiddle with our democratic traditions and
institutions. They are hard earned, by blood and toil of many down
the history. <br>
<br>
So, now that the statement is passed. I would still like to know,
what is that CGI'Br should be doing more in Brazil, in terms of
the unclear 'broader sphere'.... It is likely that if I know what
is it clearly, I may agree. But, It cannot take up the public
policy making competence of the parliament. Let people make this
point clear, and ITfC will still sign the statement. On the other
hand, if some actual incursion on parliament's role iis indeed
intended in the statement, then that must also be stated clearly.
We cannot be in these civil society deliberative space keeping
silent on such key issues.<br>
<br>
BTW, is it being asked that CGI takes up some regulatory role (for
instance, instead of Anatel which claims regulatory comeptence
over the Internet). We must know what is it we are referring to
here. Otherwise, sorry to say, the phrase to me just looks a
convenient 'backdoor' for all kind of possible things, a term made
infamous by the recent NSA disclosures :). <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Friday 27 September 2013 07:11 AM,
Norbert Bollow wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:20130927034133.06855ef9@swan.bollow.ch"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">[with IGC coordinator hat on]
The consensus call has passed.
IGC's endorsement is already reflected on <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://bestbits.net/brazil-66-unga/">http://bestbits.net/brazil-66-unga/</a>
Greetings,
Norbert
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">== letter text follows
================================================
Letter from International Civil Society Organizations to President
Dilma Rousseff in support of her statement at the 68th Session of the
UNGA September 26, 2013 Statements
Your Excellency, We, the undersigned organizations and individuals
from around the world, committed to the development of the Internet
and its use for advancing social and economic justice, would like to
express our strong support for the statement delivered this week by
your Excellency at the 68th Session of the United Nations General
Assembly. We commend you for taking a leading role on these issues
and would like to:
1. Fully endorse the five principles enunciated on the occasion, in
clear accordance with the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee’s
Principles for the Governance and Use of the Internet.
2. Stress the importance of the timely adoption of the Brazilian
Draft Bill of Internet Rights (Marco Civil da Internet) in a way
that upholds these principles and endorses the innovative and
democratic process in which it was conceived.
3. Commend the courage of Brazil in expressing disapproval and
demanding explanations from the USA about the procedures of illegal
interception of information and data, framing it as a grave
violation of human rights and of civil liberties
4. Reinforce our support for an extension into broader spheres of
Internet Governance of the experiences from the Brazilian
multistakeholder model of Internet governance, led by CGI.br.
We express our deep appreciation for your serious commitment to social
justice and development, of which an open, stable, and reliable
Internet is a fundamental pillar.
== letter text ends
===================================================
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>