<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">We must remember that entering into </font>a
process of nominating people for membership of the HLL many amount
to according a certain legitimacy to it.... Are we sure we give it
that kind of legitimacy. One does not know at present who appointed
the members of the HLL.... On what criteria, and so on... Would
getting one member of CS that we nominate on the HLL really change
much.... Would that not, to some extend, put a certain level of
moral obligation on us vis a vis the final outcomes of the HLL... I
am not ready to accept such an obligation.<br>
<br>
One of the major issues behind the Brazil meeting is to decide thing
about ICANN, its internationalisation/ oversight etc.... We should
certainly listen to ICANN itself on this... There may also be some
use to hear out an experts panel put up by the ICANN. But that is as
far as it goes....<br>
<br>
In the circumstances, we must be very cautious about what we are
doing here.... If they have specifically asked us to suggest one CS
person, we may offer one, but we must make it clear that we do not
consider the HLL as any kind of genuine multistakeholder
representative structure and so on..... <br>
<br>
The HLL announcement already wrongly asserts this as a kind of
multilateralists initiative, when it is not so.... It is a panel of
experts chosen by ICANN. <br>
<br>
Also As I write this, just now saw Bill's latest email on this issue
- we are perhaps overplaying a casual remark of Fadi.... I dont
really think that when we are not even sure they want us to nominate
someone, and would accept the nomination, we should be getting too
formal about it.<br>
<br>
Remember, Fadi said in Bali that this HLL will actually be
constituted on a bottom up way.... then they just went ahead and
announced the names.... Are we happy with this process. I am not. <br>
<br>
parminder<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Tuesday 26 November 2013 04:26 AM,
Norbert Bollow wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:20131125235657.7c43b926@quill" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dear all,
there is now an informal coordination group of some kind (tentatively
called "steering committee", although I expect that that name will
probably be changed) consisting of Anriette Esterhuysen for APC, Jeremy
Malcolm for BestBits, Robin Gross for NCSG, Virginia Paque for DIPLO,
myself for IGC, and Ian Peter as facilitator.
The most urgent issue is to demand better civil society representation
on the Panel on the Future of Global Internet Cooperation" organized by
ICANN [1].
[1]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/high-level-panel-organizes-to-address-future-of-internet-governance-232274461.html">http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/high-level-panel-organizes-to-address-future-of-internet-governance-232274461.html</a>
The current idea is that we would jointly nominate two additional civil
society people for this panel.
The following names have been suggested so far:
Anriette Esterhuysen, Eben Moglen, Milton Mueller, Sean O'Siochru,
Valeria Betancourt, Vladimir Radunovik, William Drake.
In view of the tight deadline, please provide any input that you wish to
be considered ASAP, at the latest by 23.00 UTC tomorrow Tuesday which
is about 24 hours from now.)
Greetings,
Norbert
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>