<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Wednesday 06 August 2014 12:22 AM,
Anja Kovacs wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJqNAHAvqz8ju=MFiFeQrZiFm_0chcNU8QG1ZxVMtt5SHKXptA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Dear all,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For those who are interested, there is a plenary session on
"Developing the information society beyond 2015: lessons from
the WSIS+10 Review and NETmundial", organised by the Internet
Democracy Project, tomorrow, 6 August, at 1 pm IST at the
APrIGF. I have pasted the full details of the plenary below
this message.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Remote participation should be available, (see <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://2014.rigf.asia/remote/"
target="_blank">http://2014.rigf.asia/remote/</a>) though I
heard that unfortunately today there were quite a few problems
with it.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And +1 to the proposals to write a letter to the UN
Secretary General, as well as to the USG and, I would propose,
to Fadi Chehade, who seems to have become the undisputed
cheerleader of the USG position now that the latter in many
ways stands publicly discredited when it comes to "Internet
freedom" and multistakeholderism.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">As for
Parminder's question "<span style="font-size:13px">Did we
ever ask for the WSIS model (of course with evolutionary
improvements) for WSIS plus 10 review. No, no one did" - I
thought that I share again this letter that some of us
(including some who have been following the WSIS+10 Review
quite closely) wrote to the facilitators of the
governmental negotiation processes in February. I think it
quite clearly disproves the points that Parminder was
making in his message above. </span></font></div>
<div><span style="font-size:13px"><font face="arial, helvetica,
sans-serif"><br>
</font></span></div>
<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://internetdemocracy.in/2014/02/letter-to-co-facilitators-calling-for-civil-society-input-into-negotiations-on-wsis10-modalities/"
target="_blank">http://internetdemocracy.in/2014/02/letter-to-co-facilitators-calling-for-civil-society-input-into-negotiations-on-wsis10-modalities/</a><br>
</font></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Sorry Anja, that I did not respond to this earlier. The recent
exchange about WSIS 10 reminded me of it.<br>
<br>
I am aware of the letter that you refer to. However, the issue is
deeper. I am sure that you know that developing countries, through
the G 77 drafts, have been asking for a full scale WSIS plus 10
review on the lines of the original WSIS which would included
prepcoms and all (this was the specific language of the G 77 drafts)
. If the developed countries had agreed to this demand - and at
least civil society groups supported it - we could have had the WSIS
level openness and participativeness as the baseline, which we would
certainly have improved upon through on the floor tactics, as were
employed during the WSIS - 2014 being much different from 2003-5<br>
<br>
However, for the last two years, US and its allies have been
resisting tooth and nail the demand for a WSIS 10 review that is of
the scale and pattern of the original WSIS, with its very open
prepcoms. And civil society groups have either directly, or
indirectly, supported the US and its allies in this. This is the
reason we have a truncated review process, with truncated
participatory processes, and in NY rather than Geneva, which venue
has developed better participatory processes.<br>
<br>
Now, if civil society groups really wanted a participatory and open
WSIS plus 10, the simple expedient would have been to support the G
77's efforts in this direction... But would that not been to do the
unmentionable! And obviously, not a single word got said by civil
society, much less a letter, to support G 77 demand for full scale
WSIS plus 10 with prepcoms.... When over the many months, to do this
was the right imperative, we heard all kinds of voices - including
from civil society - that WSIS 10 should be merged with SDG review -
also US's demand - which even a child can make out is nothing other
than to make sure that political issues like those related to global
IG do not become prominent enough. This was plain disingenuous. <br>
<br>
(I am of course completely cognisant to the elements within G 77 who
do not want open participatory processes. However, the case is not
helped by civil society, business and technical community
engagements, which simply *do not* want any real UN based reviews or
other IG processes. That kind of attitude simple makes those within
G 77 opposed to participatory processes feel more self -justified,
and justified to others within G 77 who otherwise are more open to
participatory processes.)<br>
<br>
Such a role having been played by most non state actors involved in
the process for the past many months, now to rue that we have a push
back from even the WSIS level of participation I think needs to be
seen through a critical, if not out-rightly doubtful, eyes... We got
it upon ourselves, because of our eagerness to side with the US and
its allies to hamstring any worthwhile UN based global IG processes,
either directly, or through entirely unsustainable demands that
actual developments of what would be summit level binding documents
be done on an equal-footing, where inter alia, big business has a
veto... A process that is followed nowhere, not in the developed
countries, and not in OECD and Council of Europe's Internet policy
development processes. It is simply impossible to follow it, becuase
it is simply unconstitutional for almost all policy forums including
the ones mentioned... But somehow, UN should follow it, and it is a
villain if it does not, hell be upon it. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJqNAHAvqz8ju=MFiFeQrZiFm_0chcNU8QG1ZxVMtt5SHKXptA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
</font></div>
<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Best regards,<br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Anja</font></div>
<div>
<font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><b>Title:</b> "<b>Developing
the information society beyond 2015: lessons from the
WSIS+10 Review and NETmundial</b>"</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif">Format: Panel
discussion </font></div>
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif">Invited panelists: </font></div>
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div>
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif">Mr. Adam Peake -
GLOCOM</font></div>
<div>Dr. Anja Kovacs - Internet Democracy Project<br>
</div>
<div>Dr. Govind - NIXI<br>
</div>
<div>Mr. Hardeep Singh Puri - Bharatiya Janata Party and
formerly Government of India</div>
<div>Mr. Paul Wilson - APNIC</div>
<div>Mr. Rajnesh Singh - ISOC</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Moderator: Prof. Ang Peng Hwa - Nanyan Technological
University, Singapore </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>Abstract: <br>
</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In 2015 the WSIS is up for an overall review. Though
strictly speaking the WSIS was supposed to be about ICTs
and development, the Internet governance issues that are
contained in it have obtained a growing role. In fact,
during the multistakeholder WSIS+10 MPP meetings, the
debate on many more 'hard core' development issues often
seemed to be held hostage to the IG debate, in that
there was a reluctance to agree on new language for fear
of the possible wider implications of such language.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The ICTs for development agenda continues, however,
to be of great importance for many countries in our
region. This then raises the question of how the
development agenda contained in the WSIS can be
revitalised. What shape do we want the WSIS agenda and
process to take beyond 2015? What shape do the overall
review in 2015 and its preparatory processes need to
take for this to be possible? What lessons can we learn
from both the content and form of discussions at the
WSIS+10 MPP and the WGEC to take the Internet governance
debate forward in a way that serves the Asia-Pacific
region and ensures that the development debate can gain
greater prominence again? What role can and do efforts
such as the NETmundial, but also national Internet
governance processes play in shaping this?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The session will reflect on our experiences of the
past 11 years as part of the WSIS process to move
forward towards a better future, and include a
consideration of lessons learned from multistakeholder
processes such as the NETmundial, the MPP and the WGEC
on how to best get the IG part of the WSIS agenda
unstuck.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:13px"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 4 August 2014 21:39,
Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net"
target="_blank">jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">Thanks Daniel, for your
point about Democracy. We all agree that Democracy is a
fragile world that can easily be twisted or lost. It is
rather difficult to admit that such a failure or loss
can be the result of the wrong acting by a dominating
player, presumably not a rogue state.
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div>Applied to mass surveillance, it seems indeed a
good idea to put Democracy in practice: a
well-balanced (and checked) democratic system allows
separation of powers (1), and counter-power (2) within
its own governing system. I am glad to act as a
responsible citizen, as you suggest, and bring my
voice to the protesting ones, but that still sounds a
bit naive without the two previous settings. So it
seems to me that the surveillance planet is not a flat
one where all countries show the same surveillance
power and desire. So maybe we should not close our
eyes so to pass on from on secret to another,
concluding that all secret services are equal. I don't
think secret services are supposed to spy simply every
citizen on this planet. That was the Stasi dream, or
the Stalinist bureaucratic terror. In Democracy, where
trust and willingness to act together are fundamental
assets, this is a great loss of taxpayer money. So,
please allow me to disagree: the US have to prove
better, and not worse. See their whistleblower new
legal vision: a whistleblower should be allowed to
speak to its boss! This is presented as a progress,
when it is just the opposite.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As Internet governance cannot be contained within
the boundaries of one single country, neither be
managed by one single country, how do we deal with a
democratic approach taking into account the two
previous points (1) and (2)?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Publicity is a good starting point at citizen
level. But CS might push a little further its thinking
and influence to offer governance innovation to
politicians if they have some trouble to understand
what citizens are concerned about, and not just
lobbyists or PR consultants are telling them over a
nice gastronomic table.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Another good point for a good start would be to
call a cat a cat: I know only one country, moreover a
self-proclaimed champion of freedom of speech that has
the technical power to organize and handle mass
surveillance, thanks to its dominant private sector
champions. So even though we can agree on the idea not
to play the antagonistic game, we still have to agree
on definitions and meanings, we still need to have
acceptance for diversity of views and opinions. We
also have to accept to speak truth to power: there was
no power grab attempt from ITU in December 2012,
neither before, nor after. And there is still not. The
current asymmetry cannot be but condemned. And we need
more US voices to honestly admit that things have to
change. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>All of that means democracy. To cherish it means to
use it.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>JC
<div><span
style="border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Optima;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-size:medium"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Optima;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-size:medium"><br>
</span>
</span></span></span></span></div>
<br>
<div>
<div>Le 4 août 2014 à 17:04, Daniel Kalchev a écrit
:</div>
<div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
<div>On 04.08.14 12:18, Jean-Christophe
NOTHIAS I The Global Journal wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Optima;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-size:medium"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Optima;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-size:medium"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="font-family:Optima;font-size:medium;border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="font-family:Optima;font-size:medium;border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="font-family:Optima;font-size:medium;border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span
style="border-collapse:separate;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">Nota
Bene:
Wolfgang, I
hope you
noticed that I
did not
mention the
troubling fact
that the US
surveillance
of all
Internet users
browsing and
emailing over
the beautiful
unified,
un-fragmented
Internet under
one single
root-zone
management,
and of all
phone users,
including
president
Rousseff,
Chancellor
Merkel,
European
diplomats,
BRICS
diplomats, all
diplomats,
politicians,
citizens, that
were hostage
of the US
surveillance
paranoia and
infernalia. We
all pay for
that.<br>
</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes, we do all pay for that.<br>
<br>
But then, what can we do to resolve this
situation? The US secret services agencies
will continue to do all of this, no matter
what. This is why they exist. Most of them
run on military style management, and
obeying orders is mandatory there. The same
can be said about the secret services of any
other country. Or any special interests
group.<br>
<br>
My experience dealing with this kind of
'operations' is that your working route is
publicity. Talk about it. Don't let them do
it in secret. Cops hate being exposed. Let
Internet users become aware what is going
on. Don't waste your time politicizing it,
in the sense of "those bad XYZ spying on us
good ABC", because this is nonsense (and not
true in general). If Internet users don't
mind being subject of surveillance, who are
we to force them?<br>
<br>
If Internet users are so upset about this
situation, they as individuals having
(whatever - voting, buying, etc) power will
act up and fix it.<br>
<br>
Isn't this how democracy should function?
:-)<br>
<br>
Daniel<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So yes let's the CS write to USG and
its digital champions. Let's start to
balance our role.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That is something everyone has
obviously in mind when considering the
fact that governments are no longer to
be seen out of the IG game. One good
reason to have CS coming strong into the
democratic multistakeholder model, JNC
and others are advocating.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>JC</div>
<br>
<div>
<div>Le 4 août 2014 à 10:46,
Kleinwächter, Wolfgang a écrit :</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.outlookindia.com/news/article/UN-Adopts-Resolution-on-Bridging-Digital-Divide/852511"
target="_blank">http://www.outlookindia.com/news/article/UN-Adopts-Resolution-on-Bridging-Digital-Divide/852511</a><br>
<br>
Outlook India:<br>
The resolution decided that the
overall review will be concluded in
December 2015 by a two-day General
Assembly high-level meeting to be
preceded by an inter-governmental
preparatory process that also takes
into account inputs from all
relevant stakeholders of WSIS. The
intergovernmental negotiation
process would begin in June 2015 and
lead to an inter-governmentally
agreed outcome document for adoption
at the UNGA meeting. The process
retains the ownership of the
preparatory meetings and the final
outcome document with member states
alone. Mukerji said the resolution
ensures that leaders, "at the
highest possible level" will meet at
the high-level plenary meeting in
December next year to adopt the
outcome of the intergovernmental
negotiations.<br>
<br>
Wolfgang:<br>
One of the big achievements in the
WSIS process was that civil society
got a voice in the process. A
Milestone was the CS WSIS
Declaratzion from December 2003
which was handed over to the
president of the first summit, WSIS
1. It became an official document.
The Tunis Agenda confirmed and
enhanced the role of civil society.
As you can see from the text above,
ten years later this process is back
in the hands of "governments only".
The final outcome document will be
with member states only by taking
into account inputs from all
relevant stakeholders (which sounds
like a joke with the experiences of
a enhanced communicartion and
cooperation over the last ten years,
including the UNCSTD WGs. Should
civil society write a letter to UN
Secretary General Ban Kin Moon?<br>
<span><ATT00001.png></span>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a
subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the
IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/"
target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on
the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's
charter, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/"
target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
Dr. Anja Kovacs<br>
The Internet Democracy Project<br>
<br>
+91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.internetdemocracy.in/" target="_blank">www.internetdemocracy.in</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>