<html>
<body>
Bertrand,<br>
could you be so kind as to introduce the nature of a 'democratic
governance' if it differs from the WSIS multistakeholder enhanced
cooperation advised by dynamic coalitions concerting at the IGF.<br>
jfc<br><br>
NB. I feel we all agree over the cooperation enhancement. Some only
disagree on the coordination statUS-quo.<br><br>
At 23:25 08/10/2013, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Facing the risk of surprising
people - and Parminder in the first place :-) I actually agree with his
comments below. We may discuss the exact modalities of implementation of
"democratic governance" but, as such, the challenge is rather
accurately described.<br><br>
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 11:48 AM, parminder
<<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">
parminder@itforchange.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<dl><br>
<dd><font face="Verdana">Any kind of over-reliance on the idea of 'data
sovereignty' is a real problem for the future of the Internet. But the
only way it can be avoided is through a better, democratic governance of
the Internet. The only option to save a global Internet is to have
democratically arrived at global norms, principles, policy frameworks,
policies and laws for the global Internet. One cant have it both
ways - deny full and equal role to developing countries in global
governance of the Internet, and also tell them that they should not, in
default, take the required measures to defend themselves and their
citizens. </font>
</dl></blockquote></body>
</html>