[bestbits] Draft joint letter on deliberative democratic processes for the Brazil meeting

[Matthew Shears]

+ 1 to Joana and Jeremy

On 2/5/2014 7:45 AM, Joana Varon wrote:
>
> +1 to Jeremy.
>
> Also, I really think a draft document (not just a compilation of 
> proposals) will be needed prior the event, so it:
>
> a) will help transparency (meaning, it will be very bad if the 
> participants get into a room for 2 days, draft something and approve 
> it without broader consultation);
>
> b) will help consensus building from March to the end of April 
> (otherwise from the submissions of proposals on March 1st to April 24 
> the Committees will just become a black box)
>
> c) probably a better proposal
>
> On the issue about who to draft it, I agree with Jeremy that we should 
> use as much tools and channels needed for an online deliberative 
> process to build it. If how to use this tool is still too broad. I 
> suggest EC convene a working group with techies for that, they would 
> have a month to organize it. Yasodara, who built the consultation 
> platform for Marco Civil is at W3C, within CGI.br, It's not 
> impossible. And we can always offer our help for brainstorming.
>
> And if any Committee need to facilitate and structure any text, my 
> take is that people will be more comfortable if it's EC, just as it is 
> announced at the first press release. As the chairs of HighLevel are 
> Touré (ITU) and the Brazilian Minister of Communication$ (in my view, 
> not the best duet for internet freedom/multistakeholderism).
>
> my two cents
>
> joana
>
>
> -- 
> -- 
>
> Joana Varon Ferraz
> @joana_varon
> PGP 0x016B8E73
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 5:11 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org 
> <mailto:jeremy at ciroap.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 04/02/14 22:02, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>>     My own feeling about it is that we should either focus on pushing
>>     for on-site deliberative mechanisms that would facilitate
>>     consensus during the Sao Paulo or on pushing for an online
>>     platform. My impression is that the organization of the meeting
>>     would lack experience to identify the best model of on-site
>>     deliberation for this particular meeting and setting. If we want
>>     on-site deliberative mechanisms in place, we would need to offer
>>     assistance with that, and this would consume us. But I think it
>>     would be worthy.
>>
>>     Regarding the platform, it is not clear to me what is the
>>     expected timeframe for us (how to make a meaningful consultation
>>     fit our schedule) and which document (if any) should be the base
>>     of our consultation. Remember, for instance, that the synthesis
>>     paper that will be produced by the Secretariat will only be
>>     available on March 7. Should the synthesis be the base of our
>>     online debate?  In my view, comments on a synthesis doc are
>>     likely to produce just another syntheses. It is not clear at the
>>     present moment that we will have an actual draft proposal on
>>     principles or frameworks prior to the meeting and, if so, who
>>     should produce it.
>
>     Surely there will have to be a synthesis of contributions as the
>     basis for discussions in Brazil, and either the community will
>     have to develop it, or the Brazil committees will have to do so;
>     and in my opinion it would be better to give the community that
>     opportunity to the extent possible.  This points to the need for
>     an online deliberative process, actively facilitated by the
>     appropriate Brazil committee/s.  The facilitation will be hard
>     enough work in itself, and involve a degree of judgment as to how
>     to present the inputs in a useful and neutral way.  I'm not
>     understating the difficulty of the exercise, but surely nobody
>     expected getting tangible outcomes from the Brazil meeting would
>     be easy...
>
>
>     -- 
>
>     *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 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599>
>
>     *WCRD 2014 - Fix Our Phone Rights!* |
>     http://consint.info/fix-our-phone-rights
>
>     @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org
>     <http://www.consumersinternational.org> |
>     www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>     <http://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.
>
>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
>     To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>

-- 
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
mshears at cdt.org
+ 44 771 247 2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140205/632e232e/attachment.htm>