Snapshots from ICANN HL Panel in London Re: [governance] [bestbits] press release about meeting of the high level panel

[Mawaki Chango]

Thanks, Vlada, for this detailed and very informative account of what
transpired at the HLP meeting in London.
Mawaki

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
*Mawaki Chango, PhD*
Founder & Principal, DIGILEXIS
http://www.digilexis.com
m.chango at digilexis.com
Mobile: +225 4448 7764
twitter.com/digilexis
twitter.com/dig_mawaki
Skype: digilexis


On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Vladimir Radunovic <vladar at diplomacy.edu>wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
>
>
>
> here are few lines on my impressions of what happened at the High Level
> Panel meeting in London on Friday. I hope it will help us better understand
> the intentions and potentials of this (dynamically evolving and
> self-reshaping) initiative.
>
>
>
> I was there in status of an observer, representing Diplo who was invited
> among others by ICANN to provide its expertise and assist the drafting of
> report by the HL panel. The Panel event was under Chatham House rule, so I
> will try to bring as many details as possible while still respecting this
> rule. The views below are my personal, as I saw the discussions and the
> process. Besides the impressions below, I (and several others) have been
> extensively tweeting with #InternetPanel (read here<https://twitter.com/search?had_popular=true&q=InternetPanel>)
> so you can get a pretty good snapshot of key points in discussion through
> that. Formal Press Release has been published and is available here<http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/high-level-panel-on-global-internet-cooperation-and-governance-mechanisms-convenes-in-london-235789861.html>– it brings more or less all the basic info on topics and participants of
> the meeting as well as the future timeline.
>
>
>
> *HL Group and experts*
>
>
>
> Panel includes 21 members listed in the Press Release; additionally, a
> final one (Anriette from APC) has been accepted during the meeting in
> London to reflect loud civil society requests. Panel is dominated by tech
> and corporate sector, with few yet high level representatives of
> governments; only now there is a panel member from civil society
> organisation.
>
>
>
> It was my impression that initially the entire HL Panel was composed based
> on “names” rather than on representation of stakeholders; yet it appears
> that it was acknowledged at the end that the absence of civil society
> organisations can hurt the process. On the other hand, civil society
> experts dominate the expert group who is supposed to assist with drafting
> the final report – as the agenda in press release shows. As an observer
> (replacing Jovan who was invited as expert but was not able to join in
> London), I did not have chance to formally raise civil society concerns
> expressed on this list and elsewhere, but other experts were involved in
> formal discussion. I hope Anriette’s formal presence in future will extend
> this direct opportunity.
>
>
>
> At London meeting there were most of Panel members, the experts, dozen of
> observers assisting Panel members or as guests, and some ICANN staff –
> total about 50 people, invited by ICANN. These are likely the people that
> will gather also in the next phases of the work. I suppose there will be no
> further changes in composition of the panel. I also got the impression the
> following two meetings will not be opened for observers rather than those
> invited directly or related to panel members, nor there will be greater
> transparency during the meetings; instead, it seems public consultations
> (primarily on 1Net) will be the public inputs into the work of the panel.
>
>
>
> *Task*
>
>
>
> The Panel has decided to be titled “Panel on global Internet cooperation
> and governance mechanisms”. Their goal is to prepare a blueprint document –
> a report – as described in press release. The focus of London discussions
> was on mapping the ecosystem and needs, discussing the “desirable
> properties” of future system, and agreeing on next steps. While there were
> interesting discussions, my impression was that there were very few new
> aspects on the table yet. It is my hope that the panel (and especially the
> experts who do have extensive knowledge of already-discussed issues in and
> various fora in previous years) will reflect to valuable outputs of
> previous IGF and other meetings rather than reinventing the wheel. It was
> confirmed that the summary of discussion points will be posted to 1Net.org
> soon asking for community reflections.
>
>
>
> The final draft of the report should be ready during second HL meeting in
> US end February; then it should be formally submitted as contribution to
> Sao Paolo meeting and Freedom Online conference in Tallinn in April, and
> offered for public consultations towards the next draft (not sure if only
> through 1Net, but probably will not be limited to that). It is supposed the
> draft report will find its place in the Sao Paolo meeting as well. The
> outputs of this and public discussions will be fed into the final report to
> be wrapped up during the third meeting in Dubai in early May. It should
> then be fed into various processes incl. ICANN meeting in London in June,
> IGF in September, etc. It is important to mention that the relevance and
> legitimacy of IGF was mentioned several times in discussions, and I had a
> feeling that the panel and experts are aware that this process should
> contribute to (and possibly strengthen) the IGF rather than undermine it.
>
>
>
> *Other components*
>
>
>
> My impression was that there was distancing by ICANN and the HL panel from
> the Sao Paolo meeting. Brazil meeting was mentioned only once at the end as
> a place where the report may be discussed – and was mentioned as only one
> such opportunity. There was no feeling that Sao Paolo conference is part of
> this initiative. At the same time the news was spread that Brazilian
> president Rousseff met French President Holland and that France might
> support Sao Paolo meeting (I found no direct confirmation for this in news
> yet however – pointers welcomed if anyone has).
>
>
>
> On the other hand 1Net was mentioned several times as the place in which
> public contributions on the draft report should be provided. It was of
> course only the reference to 1Net with regards to the HL Panel work, but it
> is possible that 1Net was envisaged with a broader goal; there was no
> further info however on how 1Net will proceed, nor on its Steering
> Committees or further steps.
>
>
>
> *Timeline*
>
>
>
> The timeline of meetings was presented in the press release as well. Yet
> let me combine it here with the updated info on other relevant 2014 events
> mentioned and not mentioned in London:
>
> 22-25 January, Davos: Side-meeting of the HL Panel during WEF annual
> meeting
>
> 27-28 February, US: 2nd HL meeting
>
> 31 March, Dubai (rather than Sharm): ITU WTDC
>
> 23-24 April, Sao Paolo: Brazil conference
>
> 28-29 April, Tallinn: Freedom Online Conference
>
> 3-4 May, Dubai: 3rd (final) HL meeting
>
>
>
>
>
> I hope this shed bit more light on what this whole new initiative will be
> about. It is slightly clearer to me now, though I still have lots of
> questions about 1Net. It is my belief that we should try to, whatever the
> initial idea behind 1Net was (and also the HL Panel), explore its
> potentials to strengthen the IGF and improve communications among
> professional (and stakeholder) silos.
>
>
>
> Best!
>
>
>
>             Vlada
>
>
>
> PS Sorry for a rather long email.. I decided to be detailed in this case,
> and mention as much as possible.
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131216/305378f4/attachment.htm>