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

[Anja Kovacs]

Having had a look at the draft letter after a good night's sleep, I agree
with Deborah and others, and will stick to my initial position that we
should take some time to develop our own agenda before dashing this off. As
someone else noted in this very long thread, doing so can also be of value
not only for this event but in a more general sense. We needn't necessarily
agree on answers, but it could be powerful if we could at least
collectively put forward (some of) the questions to be asked - about CS
involvement as much as about the role of governments. Could this, for
example, be an appropriate place to start pushing a debate on the need to
update the "respective roles and responsibilities" clause in the Tunis
Agenda, or at least the way we read it? Even if we decide not to ask for it
here, that is one item that could be added to a CS agenda for the reform of
Internet governance.

Sending letters that are too generic might also lead to them getting
ignored, which is obviously something we want to avoid. Ideally, the news
that a CS letter is on the way should fill the recipient with a pleasant
mix of excitement and apprehension ;)

My two paise,
Anja
On Oct 11, 2013 8:45 AM, "Jeremy Malcolm" <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

>  On 11/10/13 00:00, Anriette Esterhuysen 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.
>
>
> My first thought too was that this was opportunism on ICANN's part (and,
> heck, probably on Dilma's too), but so what?  When two top leaders have
> done more in one day to open the doors to Internet governance reform than
> the IGF MAG has done in eight years, hurrah for opportunism - let's make
> the most of it.
>
> But I also agree that the proposed letter is a bit light on, and that we
> should develop more of an agenda for the event before sending such a
> letter.  This can, as Deborah said, be done online and in person at the
> Best Bits meeting, and should be an output of the meeting which we open for
> endorsements and IGC consensus call then.
>
> --
>
> *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
>
> 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.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131011/75f612f2/attachment.htm>