[governance] Re: [bestbits] Roles and Responsibilities - CSTD working group on enhanced cooperation

Sat May 3 01:53:48 EDT 2014

Seem you guys know yourself so well ;) I have just recently followed and I
think your views are indeed valid.
My resolution is that "it's safer to be responsible for what I say and not
others understanding of what I said"

Thanks.

Regards

sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 3 May 2014 04:44, "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Cher Jean-Christophe,
>
> honestly I was wondering if it is worthy and rationale to respond to your
> email:
> - you always attack people, label, name and categorise them  in manner to
> discredit them, to marginalise but rarely responding the arguments.  do you
> even read their arguments? you are making a "process d'intentions" and
> putting yourself in the role to decide who is in the right side or not. you
> don't value democracy much more than me.
> - again you make tenuous and flimsy  association to things that I never
> said  or defended like mentioning McKinsey report . if you want to make a
> point about mckinsey report, use another thread.
> - you mention other statements like those made  Wolfgang; if you have a
> problem with them address you questions to him not to me. I am not liable
> for other opinions nor I have to explain them.
> - I responded to Norbert and he take the time to explain his position in
> more details and clarity while I still disagree in several points, that is
> what we call discussion.
>
> finally, I know that you will respond more vehemently, but who cares.
> Merci et bon vent.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> ps "You have the floor on this."?  seriously, you think that you can
> impose the rules or tell people when they should respond or not? quoting
> you here  verbatim :  "no kidding!"
>
> 2014-05-03 0:37 GMT+09:00 Jean-Christophe Nothias <
> jeanchristophe.nothias at gmail.com>:
>
>> If Netmundial experienced a positive and constructive spirit, even though
>> final comments by CS ended with clear expression of disappointments, I am a
>> bit surprised with your email to Norbert.
>>
>> Who ever said that the private sector would have no role? The ones that
>> are asking for a true democratic eco-ssytem (legitimacy, check and balance,
>> openness and transparency, clear mechanisms for decision making,
>> innovation, fair competition...) Who, except for the status quoers, and
>> their kindergarden folks are pretending that people challenging the current
>> MS Blah are trying to impeach the private sector from having a role. No
>> kidding! Private sector has a role indeed. One of the central question is
>> balance of power (to counter any abuse, either from private sector or
>> governments). Starting your email with such an argument is not very
>> serious. I do wonder why you go into that game.
>>
>> Could we refrain from going back to gross or prehistoric dialogue?
>>
>> I am calling for a discussion among CS to explore and clarify the
>> different visions of what could be the Internet governance eco-system in,
>> let's say, 10 years of time - Wolfgang said another Netmundial in 5 years
>> of time could be a good idea!!. I would rather have your views on these
>> visions - unless you, like some others you would share the presumption that
>> this CS dialogue cannot happen without of the private sector  and other
>> parties, being at the table, to avoid co-lateral damages out of people
>> having a free word.
>>
>> Are you feeling honest by claiming that Norbert, me and others and
>> defending a state-based model, because we remind to the current tenants of
>> IG, that democracy is very needed in IG. Calling for a democratic approach
>> sounds like some sort of nightmare to many MSist. Again, Netmundial has
>> changed the narrative: we are now exploring what means a democratic MS
>> model.
>>
>> You have the floor on this.
>>
>> JC
>>
>> Le 2 mai 2014 à 16:01, Rafik a écrit :
>>
>> > Hi Norbert,
>> >
>> > If I understand the argument against Multistakeholderism I am hearing
>> many times is to mainly aimed to prevent private sector from having any
>> role. A position which de facto prevent civil society from having role at
>> all. I guess that is just a side effect? There are problems with private
>> sector involvement but is is diverse stakeholder having SME and big
>> corporate, preventing it from participation doesn't match democratic values
>> you are mentioning .
>> >
>> > With the state-based model that you are defending, do you  really think
>> that Tunisian government during wsis 2005 was really representing Tunisian
>> citizens?  It will be just ironic while you are mentioning  the right of
>> people for self-determination. The state-based model is heaven for all non
>> democratic governments of the world ,and there are so many, because they
>> will silence easily any possible dissent voicing at global level against
>> their policies.
>> >
>> > Multistaholderism allowed me , the Tunisian  and coming from developing
>> region to participate in such process , but at least I have the decency to
>> not pretend speaking for all the south and the marginalised of the world ,
>> I will stand against all those attempts giving more rights to governments
>> than their own citizens.
>> >
>> > Multistakeholderism need and can be improved but what you are defending
>> cannot be improved at all.
>> >
>> > Rafik
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Le 2 May 2014 à 22:42, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> a écrit :
>> >
>> >> TA art. 35 is very very imperfect for a variety of reasons.
>> >>
>> >> It also was dangerous ten years ago in ways which are not a real danger
>> >> today.
>> >>
>> >> Today it is IMO an immediate and concrete danger that carelessly
>> >> designed (and thereby non-democratic) multistakeholder public policy
>> >> processes could give big business the power to effectively undermine
>> >> the human right of the peoples to democratic self-determination.
>> >>
>> >> In the relevant international human rights treaty, the ICCPR, the legal
>> >> construct through which this human right is established is via the
>> >> public policy role of states: First it is declared that the peoples
>> >> have a right to self-determination, and later in the document the
>> >> right to democratic processes is established.
>> >>
>> >> I am not asserting that this state-based model is the only possible
>> >> model of democracy, but it is what we have. I certainly don't want to
>> >> forsake it before a proven alternative is available.
>> >>
>> >> Until then I will support TA art. 35 with its privileging of states.
>> >> From my perspective there is no need for Parminder to retract anything.
>> >>
>> >> I agree of course that there are currently very real problems almost
>> >> every time that states try to get involved in a privileged role as
>> >> states in Internet governance. And I'm not talking just about the
>> >> various examples of totally non-democratic states here.
>> >>
>> >> I propose to address these problems by means of measures such as those
>> >> proposed on http://wisdomtaskforce.org/
>> >>
>> >> Greetings,
>> >> Norbert
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Am Fri, 2 May 2014 21:58:47 +0900
>> >> schrieb Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>:
>> >>
>> >>> Dear Parminder,
>> >>>
>> >>> To the best of my knowledge, no civil society entity has supported
>> >>> paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda (paragraph 49 Geneva Declaration of
>> >>> Principles.)  It was the position of the Civil Society Plenary in
>> >>> Tunis that this language was unacceptable.  To the best of my
>> >>> knowledge this position has not changed.  As recently as last week in
>> >>> Sao Paulo it was a matter that unified civil society: clearly we
>> >>> oppose paragraph 35.
>> >>>
>> >>> So it was very surprising to read that you, as a representative of
>> >>> civil society on the CSTD working group on enhanced cooperation
>> >>> should support this language, and in doing so associate yourself with
>> >>> business, Iran, Saudi Arabia, among others.
>> >>>
>> >>> Please retract your comment supporting the Tunis Agenda text on roles
>> >>> and responsibilities as copied below from the transcript.  You have
>> >>> time to do so before the WG finishes its meeting later today.
>> >>> Paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda also below.
>> >>>
>> >>> Please act immediately.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thank you,
>> >>>
>> >>> Adam
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>> PARMINDER JEET SINGH: THANK YOU, CHAIR. MY COMMENTS GO IN THE SAME
>> >>>>> DIRECTION AS THE SPEAKER PREVIOUS TO ME, MARILYN, THAT IT SHOULD BE
>> >>>>> RETAINED, THIS PARTICULAR PHRASE OF OUR RESPECTIVE ROLES AND
>> >>>>> RESPONSIBILITIES AND TO JUSTIFY IT, I MAY ADD THAT THE TUNIS AGENDA
>> >>>>> TALKS ABOUT THESE ROLES SPECIFICALLY IN THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC
>> >>>>> POLICY MAKING AND NOT GENERALLY IN VARIOUS OTHER SOCIAL ENTERPRISES
>> >>>>> AND ACTIVITIES ALL OF US GET INVOLVED IN. AND THIS PARAGRAPH ALSO
>> >>>>> ENDS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF ENHANCED COOPERATION WHICH IN MY AND MANY
>> >>>>> PEOPLE'S UNDERSTANDING IS SPECIFICALLY ONLY ABOUT PUBLIC POLICY
>> >>>>> MAKING.
>> >>> IT IS IN THIS REGARD, AT LEAST IN MY MIND, I HAVE CLARITY ABOUT WHAT
>> >>> IS THE ROLE OF DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS BEING QUITE DIFFERENT TO ONE
>> >>> ANOTHER AND I DON'T APPRECIATE THAT NON-GOVERNMENTAL ACTORS WOULD
>> >>> HAVE THE SAME ROLE IN DECISION-MAKING MAKING THAN GOVERNMENTAL
>> >>> ACTORS. THAT SHOULD NOT BE ACCEPTABLE AT A GLOBAL LEVEL. THERE IS A
>> >>> REASON FOR US TO INSIST ON IT BECAUSE I REMEMBER IN THE SECOND
>> >>> MEETING, I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT PEOPLE ASKING FOR
>> >>> EQUAL ROLES AND ASKED WHETHER THEY REALLY ARE SEEKING AN EQUAL ROLE
>> >>> IN PUBLIC POLICY MAKING. I ASKED IT FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR
>> >>> REPRESENTATIVE WHO THEN RESPONDED TO SAID I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE
>> >>> PRIVATE SECTOR AND THEY SAY, YES, WE WANT TO AN EQUAL FOOTING OF
>> >>> DECISION-MAKING. THIS IS PART OF THE MEETING. IT IS THIS PART OF
>> >>> DEMOCRACY WHICH HAS ACUTELY BOTHERED US. I HAVE SAID THIS EARLIER.
>> >>> BUT I INSIST TO SAY THAT AGAIN BECAUSE THERE ARES INENCE ON -- THEIR
>> >>> INSISTENCE ON ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES COMES BACK AND AGAIN. FOR ME
>> >>> THAT IS IMPORTANT AND WE WOULD LIKE THAT PHRASE TO BE RETAINED. THANK
>> >>> YOU.
>> >>>>> CHAIR MAJOR: THANK YOU, PARMINDER.
>> >>>
>> >>> Tunis Agenda
>> >>>
>> >>> 35. We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both
>> >>> technical and public policy issues and should involve all
>> >>> stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international
>> >>> organizations. In this respect it is recognized that: a) Policy
>> >>> authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the sovereign
>> >>> right of States. They have rights and responsibilities for
>> >>> international Internet-related public policy issues. b) The private
>> >>> sector has had, and should continue to have, an important role in the
>> >>> development of the Internet, both in the technical and economic
>> >>> fields. c) Civil society has also played an important role on
>> >>> Internet matters, especially at community level, and should continue
>> >>> to play such a role. d) Intergovernmental organizations have had, and
>> >>> should continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of
>> >>> Internet-related public policy issues. e) International organizations
>> >>> have also had and should continue to have an important role in the
>> >>> development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant
>> >>> policies.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> ____________________________________________________________
>> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> >>    bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>> >>    http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> >     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> > To be removed from the list, visit:
>> >     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>> >
>> > For all other list information and functions, see:
>> >     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>> >     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>> >
>> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140503/23af55bb/attachment.htm>