[bestbits] IGF plus

Wed Sep 4 10:20:22 EDT 2013

I agree with Anja on the OECD issue..

What I think we should do is for Parminder's suggestion on the OECD to
go to CSISAC - so for you to make that proposal in CSISAC and for CSISAC
to take it up.

I don't think Best Bits should do it directly.. more effective to do it
through CSISAC.

Anriette

On 04/09/2013 16:13, Anja Kovacs wrote:
> To make my position more concrete: I do not think that as an initiative
> from the developing world, we undermine the march forward of the OECD in
> any way by signing a letter addressed to them. On the contrary, that only
> gives them greater legitimacy. Those who are from member states could do
> so, but as far as the rest of us are concerned, I think what we need to do
> is boycott.
>
> Best,
> Anja
>
>
> On 4 September 2013 19:41, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear Parminder and all...
>>
>> Would it be possible for someone to volunteer to summarise the
>> surveillance issue and work that has been done that on that, and
>> discussion in IRP list etc. as a background doc for our meeting in Bali?
>>
>> That would cover some stuff that started prior to the Snowden
>> revelations as well as work/discussion since. That might help us work a
>> bit faster.
>>
>> Apologies for not being able to volunteer.
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>> On 04/09/2013 15:21, parminder wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 04 September 2013 04:08 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>>>> Dear all
>>>>
>>>> Apologies for chipping in at this point and not following the discussion
>>>> consistently. One idea I would like to discuss is looking at how to
>>>> build specific mechanisms to address specific problems rather than
>>>> always focusing on general problems/processes. I think this is also what
>>>> Avri and Anja are proposing.
>>> I didnt see Anja refer to anything like building specific mechanisms
>>> to address specific problems. She only discussed the day one subjects
>>> - ITU/ WSIS section and MSism part .
>>> On the other hand, I have been asking for focussing on the specific
>>> problem of global surveillance by NSA/ US......
>>>> E.g. to take the surveillance issue... we have written some letters; we
>>>> are raising it in the HRC and related bodies; there is a civil society
>>>> 'good practice' guideline (which I realise not everyone agrees on fully,
>>>> but it is still a good start).
>>>>
>>>> Can we not take this particular issue and look at what concrete
>>>> mechanisms and measures we can propose to address it in quite specific
>>>> ways?
>>> Yes, discuss the Snowden revelations issue, review what we have done
>>> till present and what else is necessary... As for the the recent civil
>>> society guidelines on privacy, there is a good discussion on this
>>> subject  in the IRP list, and that too should be carried forward.
>>>
>>> parminder
>>>
>>>> Anriette
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 03/09/2013 22:14, Valeria Betancourt wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I concur with Anja and Avri.
>>>>>
>>>>> Valeria
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/09/2013, at 15:07, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think this is a good framing.  The only thing I would recommend
>>>>>> adding to the specific aims, is preparation for the IGF itself -
>>>>>> specific action/statement for the sessions and workshops to be held
>>>>>> in the following days.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> avri
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3 Sep 2013, at 15:48, Anja Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wanted to chip in and share my thinking on two issues.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. I believe it is very important that the ITU and WSIS+10 are kept
>>>>>>> in the agenda as explicit, focused agenda items, and that we spend
>>>>>>> some time discussing and planning for the processes around them. To
>>>>>>> my mind, these are among the most important places where states at
>>>>>>> present are already trying to play out their views on enhanced
>>>>>>> cooperation in practice, with rather important consequences for
>>>>>>> civil society (I wrote about this earlier
>>>>>>> here:
>> http://beta.internetdemocracy.in/2013/07/pawns-in-a-governments-game/).
>>>>>>> In general, they are also two processes that are likely to have a
>>>>>>> real outcome for Internet governance. It is important that civil
>>>>>>> society is aware and informed, and that at least some of us are also
>>>>>>> closely involved (the ITU also happens to be the process around
>>>>>>> which Best Bits came into its own, and I think it would be foolish
>>>>>>> of us to now retreat from whatever little inroads or impact we have
>>>>>>> made).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. The reason I proposed to Jeremy that we make the first day one
>>>>>>> long session (with perhaps a discussion of EC, ITU and WSIS in the
>>>>>>> morning and of multistakeholderism in the afternoon) is because I
>>>>>>> believe that the question of how we see multistakeholderism is
>>>>>>> sharpened by our engagements in these concrete policy fora and how
>>>>>>> we plan to move forward in them, while at the same time our
>>>>>>> engagement with these fora is of course also to some extent
>>>>>>> determined by the visions and views we have when we enter them. In
>>>>>>> that sense I think that by contextualising the discussion on MS
>>>>>>> within those debates, the chances that we move forward are far
>>>>>>> greater, if not in terms of coming to a joint position, then at
>>>>>>> least in terms of understanding we all take the positions that we
>>>>>>> take.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the specific aims of Best Bits is that it should aid civil
>>>>>>> society not only in having important discussions, but also in
>>>>>>> getting concrete work done. By framing the agenda for our two days
>>>>>>> in Bali in the above manner, we can maximise our outcomes on both
>>>>>>> counts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> Anja
>>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>> www.apc.org
>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>> south africa
>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>>
>>
>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
executive director, association for progressive communications
www.apc.org
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692