No subject
Thu Jan 13 08:49:26 EST 2022
open. There were many people in the room when we modified the text after
the first and the second set of track sessions.
During the second drafting session on the afternoon of the 24th there
were conversations taking place as to whether or not the HLMC would
insist on a final round of looking at the draft statement before it
would be announced. I don't know where this conversation took place and
who exactly talked to whom but the result was that the governments
engaged in the HLMC wanted to see the document beforehand. In a way this
was only fair since they were tasked with "setting the tone" of the text.
That last session before we presented the statement was semi-public.
Many people were in the room and listened in to the discussion among
people around the table. The people around the table were members of
HLMC but also session chairs such as Anriette and me and the board.
What happened there is that some governments expressed vetos to specific
wording of the draft doc. One country expressed reservations to the
entire document. The ICANN CEO wanted one sentence to be changed and
one word removed. At that point, it seemed at least to me that the
process was about to collapse. The only chance to prevent the whole
process from failing was to remove or tone down certain paragraphs.
What I got to understand during the text editing process is that many if
not all governments would not be able to go beyond text and positions
that are part of agreed language as expressed in UN resolutions etc. The
gov reps simply don't have the mandate or authority to go beyond agreed
language in areas that matter to them.
Frankly, I don't find this surprising. Multistakeholder implies taking
into account the constraints of the other stakeholders. Within the
process of collectively drafting a statement, such limits obviously
become very visible.
So, the best we could do during the editing process is phrasing our
positions in ways that would resonate with established multilateral
language. In some areas, this worked quite well. The obvious example is
the UN resolution on privacy in the digital age. Here we could clearly
go beyond that what the private sector wanted to see in the document.
Some of the last minute changes could have been prevented if we had
better understood the limits of what government reps in this process can
do.
In other parts, civil society could have done better by simply
submitting concrete wording and back that up with several statements by
several organizations. So many interventions during the track sessions
were made for the transcript only since they did not refer to specific
paragraphs or did not suggest concrete wording!
Instead of lamenting about the specific outcome, I think we should be
more pragmatic and have a discussion about how to do better and become
more effective when the next opportunity of multistakeholder drafting
comes up.
Jeanette
Am 26.04.14 19:30, schrieb Adam Peake:
> The last meeting of the HLMC was open to observers. But it was a shame we
> didn't think to put cameras and mics in the room for the drafting sessions
> so they could have been webcast. Just that it wasn't thought of at the
> time.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 27, 2014, at 12:33 AM, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately that process was not open, and perhaps for good reason.
>> They also realize they made an error in the last minute rush, and put the
>> wrong older text in for one clause. Business is actually arguing to put
>> a better one for us back in. Will let the list know if it happens.
>> Despite the hairiness of this process, I think folks should remember that
>> there was a remarkable production of good will achieved by all the open
>> drafting sessions….this is really an unusual way to do business. Rome
>> wasn’t built in a day…
>> Stephanie Perrin
>> Cheers stephanie
>> On Apr 25, 2014, at 2:38 PM, Izumi AIZU <aizu at anr.org> wrote:
>>
>>> First, Thanks to ALL who made this impossible possible.
>>>
>>> I was wondering during the last hours of confusion about the last-minute
>>> change, as well as sort of HLMC overriding the preceding process.
>>>
>>> My question 1 was, was this finalizing the Outcome document open to
>>> observers?
>>> (I still don't know and appreciate if someone teach me).
>>>
>>> I was wondering, and also now like to propose in the future similar
>>> event, to use the
>>> online tool, I mean online Notepad.
>>>
>>> In addition to the real-time scribes, and using projectors to put the
>>> text on the screen,
>>> it will be very effective to use the online notepad (such as Google Doc
>>> or something similar), over the Internet, as we draft. Everyone online
>>> can see the process of changing
>>> the words or sentences, they can keep track of all the changes.
>>>
>>> It will be useful for all the remote participants, or those in different
>>> rooms of the same
>>> venue while small number of drafting committee people do the work, that
>>> make it transparent.
>>>
>>> Just a suggestion.
>>>
>>> izumi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-04-26 2:30 GMT+09:00 Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>:
>>> and I should have added – thanks too to the BestBits people for a really
>>> constructive pre conference get together. Without that we could not have
>>> worked together so well at the main event.
>>>
>>> From: Ian Peter
>>> Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 11:17 PM
>>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>>> Subject: [governance] netmundial 0.1
>>>
>>> The conference is now over, and many of us now go into travel and long
>>> flights. But before I do, I want to say that during this conference, and
>>> the meeting beforehand, civil society people really worked incredibly
>>> well together – far more so than other constituencies. It was great to
>>> work with a group of such talented and knowledgeable people. There was a
>>> high volume of exchange and consultation between people and speakers on
>>> our behalf, with a willingness to take on other perspectives from the
>>> group, to stand down to allow a more relevant speaker to address a
>>> subject etc. great team work.
>>>
>>> As regards the results – this was version 0.1 of this very interesting –
>>> and i think promising – version of multistakeholder consultation. So
>>> like all versions 0.1, it was full of bugs and there are a few changes
>>> that should be made and improvements. I might say a thing or two about
>>> that after I have cleared my head. So I think the process has some
>>> lessons for us, and is worth repeating.
>>>
>>> As regards the outputs – as the civil society statement said, there were
>>> areas of disappointment. I would say personally that I was very angry at
>>> last minute changes made to some sections after the formal processes of
>>> drafting and consolidating text had ended and passed through those
>>> committees to the final approval stage. This was an example of some
>>> governmental players being more equal than others. As one colleague
>>> said, more like imperialism than multistakeholderism, from a party who
>>> preaches the religion. Oh well. In time I might say more about the
>>> detail of that.
>>>
>>> But for now – there was much good as well, and it was fantastic to be
>>> involved in this with such a great group of people. All our Brazilian
>>> reps, and also our selected reps on various committees, did a fantastic
>>> job – ad it was privilege to see how well they did. They worked long and
>>> hard on our behalf and deserve a lot of praise. If I start names I will
>>> miss someone, but to everyone who represented us, I must say job
>>> extremely well done.
>>>
>>> Now to wind down after three days of intense activities. Great work
>>> everyone, really worthwhile event.
>>>
>>> Ian Peter
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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:
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> >> Izumi Aizu <<
>>>
>>> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
>>>
>>> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
>>> Japan
>>> * * * * *
>>> << Writing the Future of the History >>
>>> www.anr.org
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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:
>> 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:
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
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list