[governance] draft for a caucus intervention for Geneva

Thu Feb 16 07:32:19 EST 2006

Hi
Access and affrodability IMO are not IG issues, but many of the ways in
which they can or cannot be handled are: for example interconnection rates,
south-south traffic, FLOSS
This is why it came out as a cross-cutting issue. It's a principle that
needs to be stated - we have internet governance to ensure the principles -
the stability & security of the Internet, human rights, access, etc.
Jacqueline

On 2/16/06, William Drake <drake at hei.unige.ch> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Karen and I have gone around on this a bit since WGIG.  While it is of
> course an issue of paramount importance, I don't see access as an IG
> issue,
> there are no applicable international shared rule systems, it's a function
> of heterogeneous and uncoordinated national policies and corporate
> decisions.  Accordingly, it hasn't really been treated as such in
> WGIG/WSIS.
> Of course, one could say there should be international rules, but that's
> different, and I would think there is an obligation to say just what such
> rules might consist of.   I know Milton agrees with me and think some
> others
> did when this came up previously. There also arguably would be some danger
> of implying that international telecom rules, such as the ITU's treaty
> instruments, that are supposed to encourage telephone access, apply to the
> Internet.   Clearly it's an issue meriting further consideration and
> people
> can reasonably disagree on it.  We can talk about this in our drafting
> meeting today, but I don't think we'll reach a hard consensus on the point
> in the time available.  Maybe there's some mention that could be worked
> out
> to connect with and support APC's statement without declaring full stop
> that
> the caucus all agrees this is an IG issue per se.
>
> Best,
>
> Bill
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org
> > [mailto:governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org]On Behalf Of Gurstein, Michael
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 5:49 PM
> > To: Governance Caucus
> > Subject: Re: [governance] draft for a caucus intervention for Geneva
> >
> >
> > As I expected, but a bit earlier than I assumed, mission creep
> > for the IGF has already been initiated and by CS rather than by
> > any of the other actors.
> >
> > I'm not necessarily disagreeing with Karen and Parminder that
> > "access" (and thus "development") issues should be discussed at
> > the IGF--if not there, where; and of course, it is difficult to
> > distinguish issues of "access" and "capacity building" from
> > "development" (and I guess that then means a not too big a lurch
> > over into overall issues of ICT4D, yes?)...
> >
> > BUT, wasn't the division of responsibility to have been Internet
> > Governance/Policy with the IGF and ICT4D with the Global Alliance
> > (whose gestation has been even more lengthy and wrapped in
> > shrouds of UN intrigue--an "extensive consultation",
> > hmmm...--than the IGF...
> >
> > Again, maybe it would be best to have all the issues addressed in
> > the IGF and leave the GA to moulder with the other "high level
> > but participative UN blah blah's", but if that is the case, then
> > the responsibilities that flow from that, and for everyone
> > including (or especially) CS folks to figure out and make
> > representations around all the issues of inclusion,
> > "representivity", support mechanisms for participation, a
> > possible role in direct policy development and even project
> > implementation etc.etc. (which flows more or less directly from
> > including the ICT4D "mandate") rears its head more or less immediately.
> >
> > That is, CS like everyone else can't have it both ways--having
> > all the issues of importance (to the various components of CS) on
> > the table in the IGF, without at the same time recognizing that
> > some of those issues have much much broader constituencies and
> > much more immediate physical impacts on folks on the ground than
> > the rather more rarified (and dare I say "virtual") issues of
> > things like spam and the allocations of responsibilities within
> > the DNS, and that this being the case, maintaining the IGF as a
> > rather exclusive talk shop for Internet (and travel funded)
> > cognoscenti isn't going to (ahem) fly.
> >
> > MG
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org
> > [mailto:governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of karen banks
> > Sent: February 15, 2006 10:41 AM
> > To: Jeanette Hofmann; Governance Caucus
> > Subject: Re: [governance] draft for a caucus intervention for Geneva
> >
> >
> > hi
> >
> > i've looked over very quickly and can support
> > everything here - we would have additional points
> > to make, or would emphasize some points more than
> > others, but can do so in a separate intervention.
> >
> > the two points i would add, or, think are missing
> > - are the importance of a rights based approach
> > to the forum (with specific reference to privacy
> > and freedom of expression) and the importance of
> > an overriding development orientation to the work
> > of the IGF (i don't see any reference to
> > developing country priorities in this text,
> > excepting that of capacity building and
> > participation - which are of course important,
> > but nothing that indicates issue focus/priority)
> >
> > anyway, if this is too difficult - i can raise in our intervention..
> >
> > APC will post it's survey response today, very
> > late.. and i'll post a copy here..
> >
> > In some ways, we are still thinking, so the
> > responses are not necessarily final final positions or perspectives ..
> >
> > karen
> >
> > At 22:48 14/02/2006, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> > >Hi, here comes attached and below, and as usual
> > >very late, a potential caucus statement. Jeremy helped drafting it.
> > >
> > >*Please let us know if the text is acceptable or
> > >which parts need further editing or should be
> > >deleted because they are controversial.
> > >
> > >*The text is still a bit long. Suggestions for shortening are welcome
> > >too.
> > >
> > >Since I am travelling tomorrow, it would be good
> > >if somebody - perhaps somebody already in
> > >Geneva? Bill? - took over the editing function.
> > >
> > >-------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >I Founding principles for the Forum on Internet Governance
> > >
> > >
> > >*       Added Value: The goal of the forum is to
> > >add value to the existing institutional
> > >arrangements relevant to Internet governance by
> > >extending participation to a broader community
> > >and by improving the quality of dialogue,
> > >discussion and development in this field.
> > >
> > >*       Capacity-building: The IGF must
> > >contribute to building capacity in Internet
> > >governance amongst all stakeholders directly
> > >engaged in Internet Governance and ICT policy
> > >issues as well as within the wider communities
> > >affected by them. The IGF must overcome the
> > >specific barriers to effective participation, in
> > >particular from developing countries, found in
> > >the current institutional structures of Internet Governance.
> > >
> > >*       Multi-stakeholder approach and openness:
> > >The forum must be open to the participation of
> > >all relevant actors from all sectors and regions
> > >including governments, private sector, civil
> > >society and international organizations. The
> > >multi-stakeholder approach should not only be
> > >applied to the forum but to all bodies and
> > >processes related to the forum such as the
> > >secretariat and a potential program committee.
> > >
> > >*       Inclusiveness and remote participation:
> > >Physical attendance should not be required for
> > >participation. In order to strengthen the
> > >inclusiveness of its collaboration, the forum
> > >should integrate new forms of remote
> > >participation to enable contributions from
> > >stakeholders who are unable to attend in person.
> > >
> > >*       Equality of participation: It is vital
> > >to the legitimacy of the forum that all
> > >stakeholders participate on an equal basis.
> > >Since the forum is expected to act as a
> > >facilitating body without binding decision
> > >making capacity, equal footing for all
> > >participants is the most effective working
> > >principle to enable high quality results.
> > >
> > >*       Thematic autonomy: The Forum must be
> > >free to choose its topics as it considers
> > >appropriate. Most topics relevant to Internet
> > >Governance are cross-cutting issues, which touch
> > >upon the responsibilities and competences of
> > >existing organizations. However, the forum
> > >should not be seen as their competitor. The IGF
> > >will function as a facilitator that promotes
> > >enhanced cooperation amongst all involved bodies
> > >by generating and diffusing "best-practice" and
> > >"lessons learned" forms of knowledge.
> > >
> > >*       Forum as process: The forum should be
> > >designed as an ongoing process with most of its
> > >work taking place throughout the year in smaller
> > >thematic groups over the Internet. Its face to
> > >face meetings should constitute just one element in this process.
> > >
> > >*       Accessible location: The highest
> > >priority in choosing locations for the forum
> > >should be accessibility to all potential
> > >participants. In considering perspective
> > >locations issues such as: proximity to
> > >governmental missions and the local hotel and
> > >transit infrastructure should be balanced with
> > >concerns about travel costs and the availability of entrance visas.
> > >
> > >*       Transparency: For the sake of its
> > >legitimacy, the forum must take an open and
> > >transparent approach to its structure,
> > >procedures, membership and to all of its
> > >deliberations and recommendations. The forum
> > >must publish regular and frequent reports detailing its activities.
> > >
> > >
> > >II Tasks of the Forum on Internet Governance
> > >
> > >
> > >The Tunis Agenda for the Information Society
> > >calls on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) to
> > >play a multidimensional, catalytic role in
> > >relation to existing Internet governance
> > >mechanisms.  Among other things, the Forum should:
> > >
> > >*       Facilitate the exchange of information
> > >and best practices between bodies dealing with
> > >different international public policies
> > >regarding the Internet and discuss issues that
> > >do not fall within the scope of any existing
> > >body. In this regard the Forum should make full
> > >use of the expertise of the academic, scientific and technical
> > communities;
> > >
> > >ï'§     Interface: with appropriate
> > >inter-governmental organizations and other
> > >institutions on matters under their purview;
> > >
> > >ï'§     Strengthen and enhance the engagement of
> > >stakeholders in existing and/or future Internet
> > >Governance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries;
> > >
> > >ï'§     Identify emerging issues, bring them to
> > >the attention of the relevant bodies and the
> > >general public, and, where appropriate, make recommendations;
> > >
> > >*       Contribute to capacity-building for
> > >Internet Governance in developing countries,
> > >drawing fully on local sources of knowledge and expertise;
> > >
> > >*       Promote and assess, on an ongoing basis,
> > >the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet Governance processes.
> > >
> > >
> > >jeanette
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

--
Jacqueline Morris
www.carnivalondenet.com
T&T Music and videos online
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20060216/be027c2a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance