[bestbits] Civil society statement to the ITU Sec-Gen ahead of WTPF 2013 - PLEASE ENDORSE AND SHARE

[Deborah Brown]

Dear Parminder,

Let me try to provide some rationale for this, but others please feel free
to jump in.

On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:45 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>wrote:

>
> On Friday 10 May 2013 02:56 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>
> On 10/05/13 17:21, parminder wrote:
>
>
>
>  <snip>
>
>
> Why should civil society recommend that ITU takes up issues like Internet
> Exchanges and IPv6 adoption (subject matter of the 'opinions') and not for
> instance net neutrality, which is not among the subjects covered in the
> opinions. Why this artificial line about what Internet issues ITU may work
> on?
>
>
> There is a rationale for this but I'll let one of the others speak to it.
>
> [DB] I believe the issue here is whether or not to open up the draft
> opinions rather than drawing an artificial line about what Issues the ITU
> may work on. The fear is that by opening up the draft opinions, we might be
> left with a less desirable outcome, this at least is my sense from the
> discussions at the last informal experts group meeting and  some of the
> contributions made since the 6 draft opinions were published. The
> additional issues put on the table for consideration by governments are not
> net neutrality and development priorities, and at this point, it is
> probably unrealistic that they would be taken on. So it's not that the ITU
> shouldn't work on anything except what is in these 6 opinions, but that the
> SG should engage all stakeholders moving forward in implementing them. This
> could have been better articulated, but does this explanation make sense?
>

>
There is no response of this. I would think any clarification sought on a
> public statement deserve to be responded to ....
>
> In any case, if what is meant by the statement
>
>
> "Rather than seeking to address additional issues, we urge the
> Secretary-General to move forward in engaging all stakeholders to implement
> these opinions."
>
> is that WTPF rather than address other issues.....move forward..... to
> implement these opinions......
> [DB] Yes, specifically *engaging all stakeholders* to implement these
> opinions
>


> I am willing to sign.
>
> Can someone please clarify whether the limitation is placed on WTPF and on
> ITU for all times to come....
>


> [DB] I'm pretty sure that the limitation is meant to apply only to the
> draft opinions, not the WTPF itself or future ITU convenings, since the
> previous paragraph reads: *These fundamental human rights must be at the
> forefront of internet governance and ITU convenings, including the WTPF.
> Internet policy topics, including but not limited to affordable access,
> development, multilingualism, openness and access to knowledge, net
> neutrality, privacy, and security must be considered through the framework
> of human rights, in particular freedom of expression.*
>


> Thanks. parminder
>
> PS: I do completely agree with Michael though that we should have put real
> development issues in. This would also be in keeping with the mandate
> bestbits gave itself going forward - to get substantive and develop a
> positive agenda, rather than reacting....
> +1 on this point and Jeremy's previous remarks on best practices.
>

Best,
Deborah

>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *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
>
> WCRD 2013 – Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map:
> https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013
>
> @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.
>
>
>


-- 
Deborah Brown
Policy Analyst
Access | AccessNow.org
E. deborah at accessnow.org
@deblebrown
PGP 0x5EB4727D
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130512/6f0a9c18/attachment.htm>