<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">I have really not been able to fully follow
this thread, but I would soon. <br>
<br>
But just out of curiosity: what really is the context and urgency
to suddenly seek making the IGF permanent. (Before I go further, I
will clearly state that I would indeed like to have the IGF made
permanent. )<br>
<br>
The IGF extension review will only take place next year as a part
of WSIS plus 10 review, which is really quite some time off, plus
there are other very important issues for WSIS plus 10, and we
have not quite got into that discussion. So, I am not sure what
has happened suddenly to which we are responding. I will be
obliged if those pushing this initiative can help me understand
this. I may have missed something here. <br>
<br>
Apart from wondering about what really precipitated this issue,
and the urgency if it, I dont think the IGF is at all under any
kind of threat of being discontinued. So, why is this threat being
invented, especially when even the review is not around?<br>
<br>
I have never found any substantial opposition to continuation of
the IGF, for it to constitute any real threat. (I remember one
weak and vague statement of China once that IGF has served its
purpose and can be closed down, but not much else really.) So, why
in the middle of the intense activities of an ongoing IGF, where
in fact there are some other important issues to discuss, have we
gone into this fit of asserting the need to continue the IGF is
something I am unable to understand. <br>
<br>
BTW, I am ready to take one to ten odds bet with anyone that the
IGF will be renewed, Any takers?<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Monday 01 September 2014 09:12 PM,
Matthew Shears wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:540493E4.7030806@cdt.org" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
Jeanette, Stephanie<br>
<br>
Great initiative. Would be wonderful if we could turn this
around, get signatures and announce during the open mic/closing
session.<br>
<br>
Can we try and get comments by end of Wednesday, sign-ons by end
of day Thurs?<br>
<br>
Letter may be a little long and overly full of UN text references
- but that may be a matter of tweaking.<br>
<br>
Best.<br>
<br>
Matthew<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/1/2014 5:46 PM, Jeanette Hofmann
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:540486BE.8020007@wzb.eu" type="cite">Hi all,
<br>
<br>
Stephanie Perrin and I have drafted a statement that asks the UN
Secretary to consider renewing the mandate of the IGF on a
permanent basis. <br>
<br>
About 90% of the text are quotes from UN documents referring to
the IGF and from the NetMundial Statement. <br>
<br>
Our draft is intended to reflect the views of all stakeholders
and perhaps get a broad endorsement at the end of the IGF. <br>
<br>
Right now, it is just a draft. Changes are welcome. <br>
<br>
We have set up a pad for editing: <br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K">https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K</a>
<br>
<br>
For convenience we also paste the text into this email below. <br>
<br>
The goal is to complete the editing before the end of the IGF. <br>
<br>
Stephanie and Jeanette <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Request for consideration to the UN Secretary General on
permanence of the IGF <br>
<br>
<br>
In 2005, the UN Member states asked the UN Secretary-General in
the Tunis Agenda, to convene a meeting of the new forum for
multi-stakeholder policy dialogue—called the Internet Governance
Forum (IGF). (Footnote: paragraph 72, Tunis Agenda) <br>
The mandate of the Forum was to discuss public policy issues
relating to key elements of Internet governance, such as those
enumerated in <br>
the Tunis Agenda, in order to foster the sustainability,
robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet
in developed and developing countries. The Forum was not to
replace existing arrangements, mechanisms, institutions or
organizations. It was intended to constitute a neutral,
non-duplicative and non-binding process, and have no involvement
in day-to-day or technical operations of the Internet. <br>
The Tunis Agenda also asked the UN Secretary-General to examine
the desirability of the continuation of the Forum, in formal
consultation with Forum participants, within five years of its
creation, and to make recommendations to the UN Membership in
this regard. At its sixty-fifth session, the General Assembly
decided to extend the mandate of the IGF, underlining the need
to improve the IGF “with a view to linking it to the broader
dialogue on global Internet governance”. <br>
In his note on the continuation of the Internet Governance
Forum, the UN Secretary General confirmed that the IGF was
unique and valuable. It is a place where Governments, civil
society, the private sector and international organizations
discuss important questions of economic and social development.
They share their insights and achievements and build a common
understanding of the Internet’s great potential. <br>
<br>
<br>
The Secretary-General recommended that <br>
(a) That the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum be
extended for a further five years; <br>
(b) That the desirability of continuation be considered again by
Member <br>
States within the context of a 10-year review of implementation
of the outcome of the World Summit on the Information Society in
2015; <br>
<br>
Footnote: (General Assembly, Sixty-fifth session, Item 17 of the
preliminary list*, Information and communications technologies
for development, Economic and Social Council, Substantive
session of 2010 New York, 28 June-23 July 2010, Agenda item 13
(b)**) <br>
The NetMundial Meeting, convened by the Government of Brazil,
stated in the NetMundial Multistakeholder Statement on April
24th, 2014, that there is a need for a strengthened Internet
Governance Forum (IGF). Important recommendations to that end
had already been made by the UN CSTD working group on IGF
improvements. The NetMundial Statement also stated that “a
strengthened IGF could better serve as a platform for discussing
both long standing and emerging issues with a view to
contributing to the identification of possible ways to address
them.” <br>
<br>
Given the significance of the Internet Governance Forum for the
continuing development of Internet governance, we request the UN
Secretary General to establish the IGF as a permanent
multistakeholder forum. We also request that the UN Secretary
General work with the IGF and its stakeholders to strengthen its
structure and processes. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a>
+ 44 771 247 2987</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>