[governance] Sense of the Senate Resolution

[wcurrie at apc.org]

Well, no empire has voluntarily surrendered its control over the means of
communication...

This may be a good time to revisit the issue of a UN Framework Convention
on Internet Governance.

Building on the Internet Governance Project's concept paper: A Framework
Convention: An Institutional Option for Internet Governance and the Aarhus
Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation and Access to
Justice in Environmental Matters, a Convention on Internet Governance
could contain:

1. A definition of the Internet, the governance problem and its
boundaries.

2. The norms that should be applied to Internet governance, such as
freedom of expression, unimpeded access, right to privacy, control of
spam, universal Internet access on a single root, principles for equitable
distribution of interconnection costs, capacity building etc.

3.  Agreements on when negotiations should take place, which could lead to
additional legal agreements in the form of protocols to the Convention.

4. Explicit empowerment of the meetings of the States party to the
Convention to  provide oversight over a limited set of Internet-related
issues that are deemed appropriate for governance. This could include the
question of ICANN's position, roles and responsibilities.

5. Explicit mandatory guidelines on public participation in
decision-making  regarding policy-making on the Internet with respect to
global, regional and national institutions, which would include the
participation of civil society and the private sector.

6. Explicit mandatory guidelines for administrative decisions made by any
global, regional and national institution responsible for Internet
governance to be subject to judicial review at the instance of any person
affected by the decision.  This would guarantee access to administrative 
justice regarding the governance of the Internet.

Why raise this now?  It is unlikely that any agreement on oversight will
be reached in Tunis. The forum has already been seen (by the Economist) as
a convenient parking space for neutralising any real change with respect
to Internet Governance. So it may time to take the process beyond WSIS.

willie currie
communications and information policy manager
association for progressive communications (APC)

> Adam asks: Should we take it that the US has now definitely walked away
from its commitment to free ICANN from oversight if conditions of the
MoU were met?
>
> c.a. replies: I guess we should have understood this fact since
> Gallagher made its statement months ago... Now it is just more
official...
>
> --c.a.
>
> Adam Peake wrote:
>
>>The conclusions of the house resolution are poor
>><http://www.lextext.com/HR268.htm>.
>>"Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That
it is the sense of Congress that--
>>(1) it is incumbent upon the United States and other responsible
governments to send clear signals to the marketplace that the current
structure of oversight and management of the Internet's domain name and
addressing service works, and will continue to deliver tangible benefits
to Internet users worldwide in the future; and
>>(2) therefore the authoritative root zone server should remain
>>physically located in the United States and the Secretary of Commerce
should maintain oversight of ICANN so that ICANN can continue to manage
the day-to-day operation of the Internet's domain name and addressing
system well, remain responsive to all Internet
>>stakeholders worldwide, and otherwise fulfill its core technical mission."
>>Should we take it that the US has now definitely walked away from its
commitment to free ICANN from oversight if conditions of the MoU were
met?
>>Who decides, NTIA or the House of Representatives with the Senate
>> concurring?
>>Thanks,
>>Adam
>>_______________________________________________
>>governance mailing list
>>governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>
> --
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Carlos Afonso
> diretor de planejamento
> Rede de Informações para o Terceiro Setor - Rits
> Rua Guilhermina Guinle, 272, 6º andar - Botafogo
> Rio de Janeiro RJ - Brasil         CEP 22270-060
> tel +55-21-2527-5494        fax +55-21-2527-5460
> ca at rits.org.br            http://www.rits.org.br
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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