[bestbits] Re: [governance] Rousseff & Chehade: Brazil will host world event on Internet governance in 2014

Thu Oct 10 12:46:05 EDT 2013

Hi all,

I support the idea of outlining a civil society agenda. Perhaps that agenda
could be formatted in such a way that it could be repurposed for other
processes, so as not to single out what Parminder aptly describes as an
"unborn" initiative.

It would be good to use the Best Bits session as an opportunity to develop
this agenda, but to continue the discussion online as well, so as not
exclude those who are not able to come to Bali.

In terms of timing, if I understand correctly, the proposed date for the
Brazilian summit is sometime in April 2014. This seems like a good
opportunity to note that Access is hosting RightsCon (
http://www.rightscon.org/) in San Francisco from 3-5 March. We have opened
up the programming so that anyone can submit a session. Given the
timeframe, this could be a good opportunity to broaden support for a civil
society agenda and for CS present to strategize in the lead up to the
summit.

Best,
Deborah

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>wrote:

>  I cannot agree more.
>
> Not only do I share Rafik's skepticism, I also think we should not fall
> into the trap of thinking of ICANN (and the ICANN DNS gold rush) as being
> at the core of the policy-making processes that matter to how people
> access, use, and develop the internet.
>
> That ICANN is now setting broader agendas, along with governments,
> reflects entirely what is problematic with how power and influence plays
> out in IG and I find it alarming.
>
> Definitely agree with Anja and others who say that CS should get involved
> in this debate. A critical perspective is needed now more than ever.
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
> On 10/10/2013 16:34, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>
>  Hi ,
>
>  I insist about caution even if it is not popular :) I understand that
> some see a window of opportunity and possibility for CS to outline an
> agenda and influence a summit (which remains to be defined).
> I want CS to be more proactive and set the tone and I  found strange that
>  we are issuing statement to support other statements or speeches, I would
> prefer that we support more concrete actions and real commitments  instead
> than just plain speeches.
>
>  and in particular for Fadi, I would like to ask him to apply what he is
> preaching about multistakeholderism and respect process and stakeholders
> within ICANN .
>
>  Best Regards,
>
>  Rafik
>
>
> 2013/10/10 matthew shears <mshears at cdt.org>
>
>>  I agree that we need to approach this with some caution.  That said, we
>> should start working on a CS agenda for this summit - its good for CS to
>> communicate its expectations of such events early and we should start this
>> process in Bali.  Less convinced about the need (or desirability) of
>> writing letters of appreciation to all and sundry - we can always note our
>> appreciation in the agenda we work up.
>>
>>
>> On 10/10/2013 06:47, Anja Kovacs wrote:
>>
>> I share Rafik's caution to some extent, but it is difficult not to be
>> enthused by this proposal. As Mike points out, it is a tremendous
>> opportunity for all of us to engage in this debate. Why don't we start
>> working on another letter to Rousseff, in which we support the idea but
>> also start outlining a CS agenda for the summit? What would we like to see
>> such a summit achieving? Maybe we can use our discussions in Bali as a
>> basis from which to start drafting such an agenda.
>>
>> And maybe time for a word of appreciation to Chehade as well, at least
>> from those of us who believe that the internationalisation of ICANN would
>> be a good thing :)
>>
>> What do others think?
>>
>> Best,
>> Anja
>> On Oct 10, 2013 7:57 AM, "Jeremy Malcolm" <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>>
>>>  On 10/10/13 06:33, John Curran wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 9, 2013, at 3:02 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Do I understand correctly: according to this the President of ICANN has just agreed with the need for external oversight of ICANN, and unnamed other organizations, involved in governance/management of the Internet, just as long as it is multistakeholder?
>>>
>>>  It appears to be a significant effort to address Internet Governance
>>> challenges, including acceleration of the globalization of ICANN towards
>>> an environment in which all stakeholders (including all governments) can
>>> participate on an equal footing...
>>>
>>>
>>> It puts civil society to shame in how timid we, at large, have been in
>>> proposing similar advances on the status quo.  (I have not made much of a
>>> secret of the fact that I was disappointed in the number of endorsements
>>> that the Best Bits statement on enhanced cooperation (
>>> http://bestbits.net/ec) received, though in part I accept that this was
>>> because the statement was simply too long.)
>>>
>>> This has also, in one stroke, determined the IGF's future.  Of course
>>> the writing has been on the wall for the IGF for a while now, but it has
>>> now officially become irrelevant in terms of its larger role in
>>> multi-stakeholder Internet governance as originally anticipated in the
>>> Tunis Agenda.  Of course it will continue to have a role as a discussion
>>> forum, but the momentum for it to fulfil a  larger role has moved elsewhere.
>>>
>>> It also neutralises the effect of the old guard of the technical
>>> community (ISOC mainly) at the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation.
>>> Whilst they can still oppose meaningful implementation of enhanced
>>> cooperation reforms, this opposition is now utterly token and ineffectual.
>>> With Brazil (and ICANN!) having lost patience and forging ahead regardless,
>>> this leaves anyone arguing against reforms at the WGEC looking silly and
>>> irrelevant.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *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 <%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 |
>>> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>>>
>>> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>>
>>> *WARNING*: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly
>>> recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For
>>> instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.
>>>
>>
>>   --
>>
>> Matthew Shears
>> Director and Representative
>> Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
>> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)mshears at cdt.org+44 (0) 771 247 2987
>> Skype: mshears
>>
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>
>

-- 
Deborah Brown
Senior Policy Analyst
Access | accessnow.org
rightscon.org

@deblebrown
PGP 0x5EB4727D
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131010/9e4dccde/attachment.htm>