[bestbits] Programme for Best Bits annual meeting

Wed Aug 21 22:37:19 EDT 2013

Hi Joy,

+ 1, good idea about clearinghouse, we have multiplication of new fora like
Internet Freedom Coalition or also Cyber london conf (and so Budapest,
Seoul) . even for ITU we have CWG. maybe time to have discussion on how CS
can really be present in all these spaces and can be effective because I do
think that is not really sustainable .

Best,

Rafik

2013/8/22 joy <joy at apc.org>

>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all - just wanting to add some thoughts on the agenda and thanks for
> preparing a draft Jeremy
> Copying the original agenda back in for ease of reference:
> *Day 1*
>
>
> 1) Best Bits itself: goals, structure, processes, fundraising,
> interactions with other groups, etc. The interim steering group is working
> on a documents with our brainstorming about all this, which we will share
> soon.  The purpose of this session is to reach a consensus that we are
> heading in the right direction (or not), and to provide a mandate to carry
> out proposals that will help us grow and become stronger and more
> sustainable.
>
> 2) Global Internet governance principles and Enhanced Cooperation.  As you
> know, there are groups at the IGF MAG and the CSTD discussing these issues,
> but until now there has been no strong unified civil society position about
> the evolution of Internet governance arrangements, and this equivocation
> has played into the wrong hands.  We have been largely split between groups
> that are averse to any changes, and those with proposals for changes that
> are seen as radical.  The purpose of this session (as I see it, anyway) is
> to get together behind a shared position that can become a solid base for
> advocacy.  We already have a working group arguing over these issues (in a
> good way), which will report back to this main list soon.
>
> JL: it would be a shame if the only focus of this session was the for and
> against debate about current arrangements. There are other pressing
> internet governance issues including for developing countries access and
> national internet governance processes, capacity building and best practice
> among others. can some time be made for these as well?
>
>
> *Day 2*
> JL: I agree we should not be ITU-centric. Can we include a brief
> clearinghouse session (perhaps we can start a thread on it before the
> meeting) looking at the range of other forums which might be relevant for
> inputs - to help ensure that wider focus
> The surveillance session: i agree it should be a key focus and would
> emphasise to look at the implications of trends in the range of invasive
> and threatening actions being taken by diverse governments and then at the
> strategies for civil society to respond. I know for example, that many
> civil society groups which are leading on secure online communciations
> training for human rights defenders are doing some deep thinking about how
> to respond to surveillance at a practical not only policy level.
>
> Finally, should there be a session focused on IGF itself: the programme,
> side events and so on and sharing if there are any particular sessions or
> workshops that Best Bits feels strongly should have focus or which would be
> strategically important to have input to.
>
> thanks
>
> Joy
>
> On 14/08/2013 2:16 a.m., Anne Jellema wrote:
> > This is great, Parminder. I leave it to others to comment on whether it
> should be the sole focus of CSO discussions at Bali, or one strand among
> others - but it is definitely something that Best Bits and Web We Want
> could plan together, as it's an excellent fit with the Web We Want mission
> of consolidating and promoting a positive vision for the future of the open
> Web.
> > Beyond coming out with a statement ... even better would be coming out
> with an action plan!
> > cheers
> > Anne
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 4:18 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net> <parminder at itforchange.net>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >     Thanks to the steering committee for this great start....
> >
> >     I havent much to say about day 1. Maybe a few things, but that
> later...
> >
> >     Abut day 2
> >
> >     I think we would do well if we try not to look very ITU centric (
> and I can assure, we do)... Last year was different with the WCIT in the
> offing, but this year I dont see why a session should focus on ITU.
> >
> >     As to saying that Snowden or NSA revelations can become a sub item
> of this ITU discussion, quite the opposite is what I think would be in
> order..
> >
> >     Lets be honest, and do justice to the people of the world in whose
> name we assemble, work and expend monies.... Internet governance to the
> world right now is completely focussed on the Snowden affair. Not only
> among the laity, but even the politically well informed and articulate.
> >
> >     It is bad enough that the IGF wont largely be about NSA revelations
> (even to the extent that Kenya IGF was about the India's CIRP proposal)
> although I will be happy to be pleasantly surprised. But I cant see how a
> civil society meeting can afford to be not about it. This is my basic
> proposition..
> >
> >     I think we need to have a session on something very roughly like the
> 'The global Internet after Snowden - What will balkanise the Internet and
> what can keep it sufficiently global' - and if possible come out with a
> statement about it.
> >
> >     At the time of formation of BB, we had promised ourselves a positive
> agenda , and flogging ITU over a day once again is not what I think takes
> us towards that. (Disclaimer: I have long held that the ITU is not the
> right place for most global IG work.)
> >
> >     People are interested to know in which directions would post Snowden
> global Internet go. And we should discuss this.
> >
> >     Lets cut the chaff and go directly to what is/ are the issue(s) of
> global governance of the Internet today. For instance - what are the global
> ethics, norms, principles and legal frameworks for trans-border flow of
> data, information and digital services? Who should develop ( ensure their
> compliance) and how?
> >
> >     And wh- at is the meaning of ownership of our digital lives, and how
> statist and corporatist controls play with such rightful ownership.
> >
> >     That is what people right now most want to know... Do we have
> anything to say to them, and perhaps say on the behalf of them?
> >
> >     parminder
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     On Saturday 10 August 2013 09:06 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> >>     Since the good news that the 2013 IGF will be going ahead after
> all, it's time to revise and finalise the programme for our annual meeting
> in Bali.  The interim steering group has been talking about this, and here
> was their suggestion for topics (the descriptions are mine though):
> >>
> >>     *Day 1*
>
> >>
> >>     1) Best Bits itself: goals, structure, processes, fundraising,
> interactions with other groups, etc. The interim steering group is working
> on a documents with our brainstorming about all this, which we will share
> soon.  The purpose of this session is to reach a consensus that we are
> heading in the right direction (or not), and to provide a mandate to carry
> out proposals that will help us grow and become stronger and more
> sustainable.
> >>
> >>     2) Global Internet governance principles and Enhanced Cooperation.
> As you know, there are groups at the IGF MAG and the CSTD discussing these
> issues, but until now there has been no strong unified civil society
> position about the evolution of Internet governance arrangements, and this
> equivocation has played into the wrong hands.  We have been largely split
> between groups that are averse to any changes, and those with proposals for
> changes that are seen as radical.  The purpose of this session (as I see
> it, anyway) is to get together behind a shared position that can become a
> solid base for advocacy.  We already have a working group arguing over
> these issues (in a good way), which will report back to this main list soon.
> >>
> >>     *Day 2*
>
> >>
> >>     3) The ITU processes, up to the ITU Plenipotentiary in 2014 and the
> WSIS+10 review.  What is coming up?  What is our long term strategy?  Have
> we responded adequately to the ITU's most recent refusal to open up the
> Council Working Group on Internet Policy to stakeholders?  If we still
> don't see change at the Plenipotentiary, what then - do we disengage?
> >>
> >>     4) The NSA surveillance issue may become a sub-item of the ITU
> discussion, given that there are countries that may bring this debate to
> the ITU. But it will also include an update on the Human Rights Council,
> stateside developments, how this has altered the Internet governance
> landscape in the long term, and general strategy going forward.
> >>
> >>     There's also a lot of other work to be done between now and then,
> including work on the website (so that you can actually register for the
> meeting!) and on fundraising (to help pay for it).  I'll be posting more
> about that very soon.
> >>
> >>     Meanwhile your comments are invited on the programme...
> >>
> >>     --
> >>
> >>     *Dr Jeremy Malcolm
> >>     Senior Policy Officer
> >>     Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for
> consumers*
>
> >>     Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
> >>     Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala
> Lumpur, Malaysia
> >>     Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599>
>
> >>
> >>     Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement
> knowledge hub |
> http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone
> >>
> >>     @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org><http://www.consumersinternational.org>|
> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
> <http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational><http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>
> >>
> >>     Read our email confidentiality notice
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality><http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Anne Jellema
> > Chief Executive Officer
> > Cape Town, RSA
> > mob +27 61 036 9652
> > tel +27 21 788 4585
> > Skype anne.jellema
> > @afjellema
> >
> > World Wide Web Foundation | 1889 F Street NW, Washington DC, 20006, USA
> | www.webfoundation.org <http://www.webfoundation.org/><http://www.webfoundation.org/>| Twitter: @webfoundation
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSFW72AAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqlaYH/1VO5qy4FHaErnEKeq5IJ+lU
> ayzyQWzcCFC5d4aztko5Js/Mp47qTnG745xm77cYRC1n1FyTWR3F7THUZYcJTWlJ
> 5AdNG7YcDhN7c4A+mnpnuUIPmzpnvO936GLSAn5BxByw3qNG4M1kDJaPh2Q31VQw
> ReoiJSSSoQa+GG9IpMkrgyzRWNySQW3xVPUCiOKCeEv/A9zd3kxAPRfN5MlyG3Gf
> KuWqE44RE75qdZhS8Pnp8bKM7F0+2vsl9ly7UNMHwecbILA5mkfG7gIcAVBmccE2
> jSBNupV4z4caWkg3D0c+38WN1zPRma77mU4g3simF1JoEidQ0NoTjDkWDBIUFkM=
> =q01i
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130822/3bc3ef3e/attachment.htm>