[bestbits] [] Re: [] Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITU Plenipot joint recommendations

[JOSEFSSON Erik]

Great thread! Thanks!!

Did anyone touch upon enforcement of agreed rules for (internet) governance?

Or turning that around, MSism ends where enforcement begins?

From another sphere; "Cold harmonisation" was a concept describing the state of the European patent regime before the EPO became a bureaucracy with a distinct self interest. Back then, nobody forced parties to the convention (EPC) to get in line, but the mere possibility of that the same (national) patent could be granted in Munich and rejected in Stockholm[1] created an architectural incentive to align granting practices on a voluntary basis.

//Erik


"’Legislating’ is, by definition, a law-making activity that in a democratic society can only occur through the use of a procedure that is public in nature and, in that sense, ‘transparent’. Otherwise, it would not be possible to ascribe to ‘law’ the virtue of being the expression of the will of those that must obey it, which is the very foundation of its legitimacy as an indisputable edict. In a representative democracy, it must be possible for citizens to find out about the legislative procedure, since if this were not so, citizens would be unable to hold their representatives politically accountable, as they must be by virtue of their electoral mandate. In the context of this public procedure, transparency therefore plays a key role that is somewhat different from its role in administrative procedures. While, in administrative procedures, transparency serves the very specific purpose of ensuring that the authorities are subject to the rule of law, in the legislative procedure it serves the purpose of legitimising the law itself and with it the legal order as a whole." - AG in C‑280/11
http://euwiki.org/Ensuring_utmost_transparency_--_Free_Software_and_Open_Standards_under_the_Rules_of_Procedure_of_the_European_Parliament#Legislative_Openness

[1] The Pettersson Patent http://www.ffii.se/erik/misc/pettersson/
________________________________
From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] on behalf of Avri Doria [avri at acm.org]
Sent: Saturday 25 October 2014 06:52
To: Best Bits
Subject: Re: [bestbits] [] Re: [] Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITU Plenipot joint recommendations


On 25-Oct-14 00:12, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal wrote:

The irony might lay somewhere else: it appears that your vision of a future (to-be-achieved) MSism tends to ignore a necessary critic of what MS was and still is. It also appears to start with the premise that any current form of classical representativity or democracy should be seen as non valid form to contribute to the future of Internet Governance, in order to switch from the current asymmetry to a so-called Participative MS Democratic form of Internet Governance. The irony is that everything that is related to classical representation, governmental actors, national or transnational law is considered as BAD for IG. This dogma - to exclude classical means of representativity or Democracy - is as radical as to refuse to listen to engineers, business, researchers, civil society who contribute directly or indirectly to IG. And to label the ones calling for respect of classical representativity or democracy "radical multilateralist" is simply unfair.

Hi,

This is just not the case.  I believe that the representatives from government participate among the other stakeholders and indeed form a stakeholder group, or groups, of their own.  I believe multistakeholderism (m17m) must include the governments, doing what governments do, in the discussions among all stakeholders.

Without that component, it would be a problem.  My definitions, and I believe those of many, builds on representative democracy by including it in the mix.  My argument for equal footing  at least in all discussions, includes governments as well as the other stakeholders.


that evil for IG emerges

If there is emergent evil (though I am not sure I believe in evil as I am not a Manichean)  I certainly would not define it as all coming from governments.  If I were to define something that could be called emergent evil in Ig, I might define it as stemming from an absence of equal footing in all discussions.

avri
m17m.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20141025/80a84446/attachment.htm>