[governance] preparations for prepcom 3 in tunis

Sun Oct 16 16:13:09 EDT 2005

Agree that we need a redefinition of the role of CS and also maybe the EU
route may be simpler, although not the best definition.

Laina

-----Original Message-----
From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org
[mailto:governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Adam Peake
(ajp at glocom.ac.jp)
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 2:01 PM
To: karen banks
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] preparations for prepcom 3 in tunis

On 10/14/05, karen banks <karenb at gn.apc.org> wrote:
> hi adam
>

[stuff deleted]

>
> we never resolved para 43? roles and resopnsibilities.. we may want to 
> continue to push that one, at least make it clear, for the record, 
> that we do not accept that para - it is our last chance
>

(note chair's paper at
<http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=2130|0>
I'm referring to paragraphs from that version.)

Agree. The respective roles and responsibilities of stakeholders are
referred to frequently in the chair's paper, would be very good if we could
get the current description of CS changed, it is:

"45 c.) Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters,
especially at community level, and should continue to play such a role;"

In Geneva the EU proposed deleting "especially at community level".

In one of our interventions (ignored by govt.) we asked it be changed to:

"Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters. This
role has ranged from capacity building at the community level to the
contribution of much of the technological innovation and to the creation of
much of the content that makes the Internet what it is today.  Civil Society
should continue to play such a role."

Think we might have more luck supporting the simplier EU suggestion.

Para 65 includes "We also underline the importance of countering terrorism
in all its forms and manifestations on the Internet, while respecting human
rights and in compliance with ..."

Human Rights caucus objected to "in all its forms and manifestations on the
Internet" saying "It is totally unclear what "manifestations" of terrorism
on the internet would be. This language opens a dangerous door to censorship
and infringements on Freedom of Expression."

We should ask for it to be deleted.

> >The open sections of the chapter are:
> >
> >* Public policy issues relevant to Internet governance (sub section 
> >of 10 paragraphs)
> >* cybercrime (one paragraph)
>
> is this re the convention and objections from russia and china?
> (which seems odd)
>

The open paragraph is 61.  I don't know which govt supported or not.

> >* Internet security (one paragraph)
> >* Interconnection costs for LDCs (one sub-paragraph)
>
> this i would like to priotise.. especially if it's open
>

Yes, it's open,  Just one part (g) of para 71 and the comments made by the
CS financing coalition cover it.

> >* Follow-up and possible future arrangements (i.e. oversight, the 
> >forum, and all the stuff that's hard to agree.)
>
> can you list the para numbers re the above?
>

Open paragraphs are:

* Public policy issues relevant to Internet governance:  Section 3, para
48-59
* cybercrime: para 61
* Internet security: para 66
* Interconnection costs for LDCs: para 71, sub section g (only)
* Follow-up and possible future arrangements: Section 5, para 76 on (section
not done at all.)

Thanks,

Adam

>
> >Seems we have three things to do:
> >
> >1.)  make our case for being included in the resumed sessions 
> >sub-committee A when it meets in plenary and in drafting groups.  The 
> >situation is not clear. Charles Geiger's said that the room to be 
> >used for the prepcom would be relatively small (perhaps less than 400 
> >people) so delegations would be limited in number. He also said no 
> >decision had been reached on allowing observers into drafting groups.
> >
> >We should consider re-writing the protest statement Avri read in 
> >Geneva (attached "AD-protest-Statement-05-09-28")  We are expecting 
> >to hear more about how process for the Tunis prepcom next week.
>
> yes..
>
> >If we have a limited number of passes into the prepcom, we need to 
> >think about how to allocate them (it's a working session.) Should 
> >also make sure that if space is limited then there are overflow rooms 
> >where people can follow the discussions remotely on an internal TV 
> >broadcast (has been done in other prepcoms) and that there is 
> >webcasting.
>
> yes.. in fact, we should put together a proposal for this in any 
> case.. to be ready
>
> >2.) respond to the chairs current draft of chapter 3. We made a 
> >number of statements relevant to the open sections of the chapter 
> >during the last prepcom.  These statements were put together quickly 
> >in Geneva and I know people had comments and suggested improvements.
> >I have attached copies of what I think are the main statements (hope 
> >I've note missed any?), please read and comment.  If you disagree 
> >with something please say why and try to provide new text.  Vittorio 
> >has put all the statements we've been able to find online, see 
> ><http://www.net-gov.org/docs.php>
>
> ok..
>
> >3.) Write our own statement.  Jeanette has suggested it might have 3
> >parts: forum, oversight, development.  Work on a statement could go 
> >together with work on the chair's paper.
>
> how would this mesh with 2) - a completely new visionary statement?
> (like geneva?)
>
> >Comments on above please.
>
> sounds like a good plan
>
> one thing i would like is that we make sure we have someone with us 
> who can write for the press while we are there.. apc will bring two 
> media people, but neither are really up on IG issues
>
> do we have others amongst our numbers who are? (though, i would be 
> concerned if they wrote stories with the same slant as the mainstream 
> press we've seen post prepcom III)
>
> karen
>
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>

--
Email from Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> Email from my Gmail account
probably means I am travelling.  Please reply to  <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> Thanks!

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance