[bestbits] Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities

[Gene Kimmelman]

These important points remind me that it may be useful to ensure we have a
process/system for sharing all important information (are people
comfortable that just posting to the list is the best way?); and it also
reminds me that it would bve most useful to know who plans on attending
which upcoming meetings -- I'm thinking particularly about the Paris
WSIS+10, but it would be great to have a list for all major meetings.  Some
of us have to decide where to invest money for travel, and knowing who will
attend may indicate particular gaps in CS presence, or meetings where we'll
have a critical mass attending who can discuss broader policy issues.

So to start, I'd love to know who plans on coming to the Paris meeting.
Thanks!

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

>  On 17/01/13 10:11, michael gurstein wrote:
>
> In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the
> Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology
> Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx
> I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as
> (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I
> believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below...
>
>
> That part is all well and good, but the part that worries me (sorry if you
> already heard from me about this on another list) is the treatment of "The
> Multi-stakeholder Model" in the draft, in which it is correctly stated that
> "A divergence in opinion is observed in the implementation of the WSIS
> multistakeholder model in the current Internet governance ecosystem", but
> that this is a divergence between only two views, one of which is that "the
> current governance of the Internet is sufficiently multistakeholder and
> inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups" (attributed to
> Cisco, UK, USA and ISOC), and the second (attributed to Saudi Arabia and
> Sudan and Algeria!) that "with regards to international Internet-related
> public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been
> allowed to evolve according to WSIS principles".
>
> What about the third, missing view - that the current governance of the
> Internet is NOT sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of
> involvement of all stakeholder groups, but that rather than governments
> being left out, it is civil society!  We can point to so many examples of
> this, beginning at the ITU itself.
>
> I think the report needs to be changed to correct this erroneous
> characteristion of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance.
> However the ITU is only receiving submissions from members (there is an
> open platform for general comments, but they won't be received as direct
> inputs to the SG's report).  We will therefore need to put in our
> submission either through a friendly government (those who were members of
> delegations at WCIT will already have these connections), or through a
> sector member.  Consumers International has applied for sector membership,
> but our application does not come up for consideration until June.  We do
> have a CI member who is a sector member, but is there anyone else on this
> list who also is (and who is less status-quoist than ISOC)?  If not I will
> work with my member on some text.
>
> --
>
> *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
>
> *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:*
> http://consint.info/RightsMission
>
> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org |
> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130117/dd2c9201/attachment.htm>