AW: [governance] Burr & Cade: proposal for introducing multi-lateral oversight of the root

[Jeanette Hofmann]

> i also don't think much of the argument of 'the segment (govt, ps,  cs) 
> is better at x gets to rule x'  this is a argument meant to  maintain a 
> status quo as those in control always appear to know best  and it is one 
> that ignores the importance of stakeholders.  i think  that it not about 
> who is best at oversight, it is rather who is a  stakeholder and 
> therefore has an equal right of participation in any  necessary oversight.

It is not about who knows best. Governments do have a different type of 
(formally) legitimate authority. Governments make binding decisions. 
Governments can regulate ISPs. For example, they can impose rules of 
non-discrimination or data protection provisions on ISPs. There is no 
doubt that governments have specific means of political oversight at 
their disposal that no other group of actors has. And, of course, they 
make use of those means.

I don't see any point in denying this, and in more general terms, I also
don't see why the Internet should be treated differently than any other 
cross border or transnational policy field. As long as the government's 
authority is constrained by a democratic constitution, I don't have any 
problem with it. In my view self-governance mechanismis would have to 
develop similar constitutive elements in order to gain such a high level 
of legitimacy. Excluding governmens from transnational policy making 
sounds like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

For me the whole debate on political oversight is about _how_ the 
various groups, stakes, regions etc. can be legitimately integrated in 
decision making procedures. If the principle of sovereignty is not a 
satisfiying solution anymore, what does a better answer look like?

jeanette


> 
> then again i, as many of the CS participants, was never comfortable  
> with the WSIS/WGIG determination of 'participation of each according  to 
> their proper role'.  this sort of reasoning is meant to keep  people in 
> their place and i see no reason why CS should accept the  place it has 
> been given by governments.  and i repeat, i see no  reason to ever 
> accept government (uni or multilateral) primacy in the  Internet.
> 
> 
> a.
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance