[bestbits] draft Best Bits statement on UGF 2014

Tue Sep 2 09:15:15 EDT 2014

just a little observation - but I will put more time into this soon

Lets unify the use of the Brazil meeting as NETMundial or "Brazil's
NETMundial" "or Global Multi...etc etc ..meeting" - notice the caps. Just
to be sure the support giving is regarding what happened in Brazil and not
the ICANN+WEF initiative.

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:

> On Sep 2, 2014, at 2:01 PM, joy <joy at apc.org> wrote:
>
> > Dear all - just following up on the agreement at the Best Bits meeting
> > earlier this week for a statement on the IGF.
> > Many thanks to those who made comments on the draft statement which is
> > in the meeting document https://etherpad.mozilla.org/NnbQgXIv8Y
> > The draft statement has been tidied and now has a clean version starting
> > at line 325.
> > Please do try to review by the end of Wednesday so that any edits can be
> > made and sent in time for a deadline of agreement of end of Thursday
> > Turkey time for presentation at the IGF on Friday.
>
> So to clarify, there are now *three* overlapping statements:
>
> 1. One from Jeanette, Stephanie and others at
> https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K which is proposed to be a
> *multi-stakeholder* statement on extension of the IGF.[0]
>
> 2. One at https://etherpad.mozilla.org/NnbQgXIv8Y from line 325 which is
> a draft opt-in Best Bits sign-on statement on IGF extension and other
> issues.[1]
>
> 3. A subset of 2, being simply the paragraph "We call for the
> establishment of the IGF as a permanent multistakeholder forum within the
> framework of the UN, that should be reformed and strengthened," which has
> the distinction of being a *consensus* outcome of our Best BIts meeting.
>
> MY QUESTION:
>
> It is clear what happens to 2 - we add it to Best Bits website for
> individual endorsement as per our usual practice.  But what happens with 1
> and 3?  I suggest recording 3 on the "Outputs" tab of our meeting page at
> http://bestbits.net/events/best-bits-2014.  But what would be an
> appropriate way for Best Bits network members to show support for 1 (I
> don't suppose we can assume it inherits the consensus that we reached on 3)?
>
>
> [0] Current full text below:
>
> In 2005, the UN Member states asked the UN Secretary-General in the Tunis
> Agenda, to convene a meeting of the new forum for multi-stakeholder policy
> dialogue—called the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). (Footnote: paragraph
> 72, Tunis Agenda)
>
> The mandate of the Forum was to discuss public policy issues relating to
> key elements of Internet governance, such as those enumerated in the Tunis
> Agenda, in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security,
> stability and development of the Internet in developed and developing
> countries. The Forum was not to replace existing arrangements, mechanisms,
> institutions or organizations. It was intended to constitute a neutral,
> non-duplicative and non-binding process, and have no involvement in
> day-to-day or technical operations of the Internet.
>
> The Tunis Agenda also asked the UN Secretary-General to examine the
> desirability of the continuation of the Forum, in formal consultation with
> Forum participants, within five years of its creation, and to make
> recommendations to the UN Membership in this regard. At its sixty-fifth
> session, the General Assembly decided to extend the mandate of the IGF,
> underlining the need to improve the IGF “with a view to linking it to the
> broader dialogue on global Internet governance”.
>
> In his note on the continuation of the Internet Governance Forum, the UN
> Secretary General confirmed that the IGF was unique and valuable. It is a
> place where Governments, civil society, the private sector and
> international organizations discuss important questions of economic and
> social development. They share their insights and achievements and build a
> common understanding of the Internet’s great potential.
>
> The Secretary-General recommended that
> (a) That the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum be extended for a
> further five years;
> (b) That the desirability of continuation be considered again by Member
> States within the context of a 10-year review of implementation of the
> outcome of the World Summit on the Information Society in 2015;
>
> Footnote: (General Assembly, Sixty-fifth session, Item 17 of the
> preliminary list*,  Information and communications technologies for
> development, Economic and Social Council, Substantive session of 2010 New
> York, 28 June-23 July 2010, Agenda item 13 (b)**)
>
> The NetMundial Meeting, convened by the Government of Brazil, stated in
> the NetMundial Multistakeholder Statement on April 24th, 2014, that there
> is a need for a strengthened Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Important
> recommendations to that end had already been made by the UN CSTD working
> group on IGF improvements. The NetMundial Statement also stated that “a
> strengthened IGF could better serve as a platform for discussing both long
> standing and emerging issues with a view to contributing to the
> identification of possible ways to address them.”
>
> In 2016 it  will have been ten years since the establishment of IGF.  We ,
> the undersigned multistakeholders, believe it has proven its worth.
> (content here on why)  We think it is time to build on the success and to
> strengthen the forum that the UN initiated with the Tunis Agenda, and to
> give it a solid mandate and reliable financial support. These two goals are
> interrelated.  To address the need for sustainable funding, the Internet
> Governance Forum Support Association (http://www.igfsa.org/) was formed
> at IGF 2014.  The goal of this non-profit  is to support and promote
> sustainable funding for the IGF. This funding effort as well a other
> existing funding mechanisms, together with long range planning for the IGF
> are essential in creating the  strengthened IGF the Internet community
> needs in order to continues its work for the global Internet development
> goals.
>
> Given the significance of the Internet Governance Forum for the continuing
> development of Internet governance and based on success of the two 5 year
> periods of IGF operation, we request the UN Secretary General to  establish
> the IGF as an ongoing  (permanent) forum.  We believe that the IGF should
> move beyond its initiation phase where repeated renewal by the UN General
> assembly is required and that it be allowed to do long range planning for
> its continuing and evolving work. We also request that the UN Secretary
> General work with the IGF and its stakeholders to strengthen its structure
> and processes in the spirit of its open and multistakeholder foundation.
>
>
> [1] Current full text below:
>
> We, the undersigned below and all members of the Best Bits Network,
> re-emphasise that human rights and development are underlying concerns  for
> all internet governance processes and mechanisms. At this 2014 IGF  in
> Istanbul we wish to in particular call for: (and then the specific  demands
> below)
>
> 1. We express serious concern about the shrinking space for freedom of
> expression and access to information in Turkey, especially in relation to
> internet filtering and blocking of content. Therefore Best Bits welcomes
> the initiative of the Internet Ungovernance Forum and Turkish civil society
> organizations to address this threat to human rights.
>
> 2. We call for the establishment of the IGF as a permanent
> multistakeholder forum within the framework of the UN, that should be
> reformed and strengthened.
>
> 3. We call for a more thorough and timely review  of the IGF post-Istanbul
> (rather than waiting until early 2015) in order to look at  potential
> changes that could lead to its further strengthening.
>
> 4 . We support NetMundial and its recommendations for the IGF, but express
> concerns about the number of new processes which civil society is being
> asked to be involved outside of the IGF and call for it to continue as the
> key forum for internet governance issues.
>
> 5. We commend the IGF for responding to the NETmundial roadmap by, for
> example, focusing on Net neutrality and ask the MAG and UNDESA and Brazil
> who is the host of the 2015 IGF to build on this, and to use regional and
> national IGFs as part of this process.
>
> 6. We call for the opening up of the WSIS+10 review modalities to ensure
> that stakeholders interests and views are heard and taken into account.
>
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
>
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>

-- 
-- 
*Carolina Rossini *
*Vice President, International Policy*
*Public Knowledge*
*http://www.publicknowledge.org/ <http://www.publicknowledge.org/>*
+ 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140902/e41ef93e/attachment.htm>