[governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
William Drake
drake at hei.unige.ch
Tue Jan 9 11:21:04 EST 2007
Hi,
I agree that it's better to be short and get to the point quickly, but
wonder whether a wee bit of elaboration on Milton's last sentence might
prompt more specific answers and capture the spirit of Parminder's last
paragraph, e.g. replacing
>> What
>> concrete measures have been taken and what role is contemplated for
>> civil society in them?
With
In particular, we would very much welcome information on a) any discussions
and consultations that have been held with governments and other
stakeholders on the substance and modalities of enhanced cooperation, and b)
the plans for beginning to involve civil society in the process per the
clear mandate in paragraph 71 of the Tunis Agenda.
..or something like that...
Best,
Bill
On 1/9/07 8:38 AM, "Adam Peake" <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> Parminder, I think Milton's captured what we need.
>
> Short and to the point, and should bring the answer we need. You
> probably need to spell out Internet Governace Caucus (IGC), but then
> it's done.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> At 9:22 AM -0500 1/9/07, Milton Mueller wrote:
>> Parminder:
>> Thank you for an extensive effort on this draft. Perhaps some of the
>> delay in getting there stemmed from what I think is your overestimate of
>> the amount of work required.
>>
>> I really think in this case we need to be very concise and to the
>> point. Something like,
>>
>> " Dear Nitin:
>> <insert a line or two of pleasantries if you wish>
>>
>> We are writing to you because we understand you were asked by the UN
>> Secretary General to begin informal consultations on how to start a
>> process aimed at enhancing cooperation on international public policy
>> issues related to the Internet.
>>
>> The IGC would very much appreciated an update on progress and news of
>> the current state of play with respect to "enhanced cooperation." What
>> concrete measures have been taken and what role is contemplated for
>> civil society in them?
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> parminder at itforchange.net 1/9/2007 1:21 AM >>>
>>> Where are our coordinators? Wouldn't it be appropriate for them to
>>
>>> initiate action on this, e.g. develop a draft?
>>
>>
>>
>> I apologize for being amiss on this issue after promising on 30th last
>> to do
>> a draft in 3-4 days.
>>
>>
>>
>> A draft is enclosed for your consideration, and also pasted in the body
>> of
>> this email below.
>>
>>
>>
>> A couple of points about the draft.
>>
>>
>>
>> Firstly, I have made it elaborate rather than concise - arguing the
>> case and
>> making a formal claim to know the present position against clear
>> commitments, as a stakeholder of the WSIS and post WSIS process.
>>
>>
>>
>> Secondly, between the options of considering 'enhanced cooperation'
>> (EC) as
>> THE required public policy process(es) spoken of in paras 60 and 61 of
>> Tunis
>> agenda, or considering it as one of the processes which gets discussed
>> in
>> more details in the subsequent parts, I have taken the latter option.
>> Tunis
>> agenda can be read either way, and there can be multitude of opinions
>> on
>> this issue. However, I preferred to avoid putting all our 'public
>> policy'
>> eggs in the EC basket. Also there is the problem that the opening para
>> 69
>> that mentions EC for the first time seem to capture it in a somewhat
>> exclusive governmental framework. The overall paras 61 however is more
>> multistakeholder inclusive. In any case, other paras talk about
>> different
>> public policy mechanisms/ processes etc for ccTLDs (63) and gTLDs
>> (64)..
>> Keeping EC as just one of the envisaged/possible mechanisms of public
>> policy
>> also helps us to keep a way out of a situation where a slightly
>> improved
>> GAC, is attempted to be passed off both as the EC as well as all that
>> was
>> ever meant in Tunis agenda as any kind global public policy space or
>> process
>> ..
>>
>>
>>
>> Parminder
>>
>>
>>
>> (draft below, and also enclosed as attachment)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nitin Desai
>>
>> Special Advisor to the Secretary-General, United Nations.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Mr Desai,
>>
>>
>>
>> Wishing you a happy and fulfilling 2007!
>>
>>
>>
>> The Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) would like to congratulate you for
>> the
>> very successful first meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). A
>> good
>> amount of the credit for this goes to your personal leadership, and
>> that of
>> your advisory team. The first meeting of the IGF was a crucial
>> mould-setting
>> exercise, and we appreciate the fact that all parties approached it
>> positively, and with due care. We have been able to set the stage for a
>> new
>> multistakeholder exercise in global governance which is indeed
>> path-breaking, not only in the area of governance of the Internet, but
>> in
>> general as an outstanding example for future reforms in global
>> governance.
>>
>>
>>
>> IGF has got firmly established as an open platform, inclusive to all,
>> which
>> gives an opportunity to discuss and debate public policy issues related
>> to
>> the Internet, and explore possibilities as well as constituencies for
>> needed
>> change and reform. Some of these issues can even reach high enough
>> degree of
>> consensus among the involved parties that can drive change on its own -
>> for
>> instance agreements on new technology or legal standards,
>> incorporating
>> agreed issues of public interest, that are acceptable to all
>> stakeholders,
>> civil society groups, business and the governments. However, the fact
>> remains that most public policy processes at the IGF, at least after
>> they
>> reach a level of maturity of debate and deliberation in the IGF,
>> require
>> inputting into an appropriate political arena of global public policy
>> making. It is the lack of progress in this area in the post WSIS period
>> that
>> continues to cause concern to us.
>>
>>
>>
>> The Tunis agenda clearly recognizes 'that there are many cross-cutting
>> international public policy issues that require attention and are not
>> adequately addressed by the current mechanisms' (paragraph 60 of Tunis
>> agenda). It further affirms, for this purpose, the 'need to initiate,
>> and
>> reinforce, as appropriate, a transparent, democratic, and multilateral
>> process, with the participation of governments, private sector, civil
>> society and international organizations . (p 61). The Tunis agenda
>> also
>> expressly calls for 'creating an environment that facilitates this
>> development of public policy principles' (p 70). The intent and mandate
>> of
>> the Tunis agenda in terms of the importance and urgency to proceed with
>> the
>> task of developing public policy principles for the Internet, and
>> processes/mechanisms for their development and application, is quite
>> evident.
>>
>>
>>
>> As one form or possibility for this exercise, paragraph 71 lays out
>> such a
>> clear mandate that it is worth quoting in full.
>>
>>
>>
>> The process towards enhanced cooperation, to be started by the UN
>> Secretary-General, involving all relevant organisations by the end of
>> the
>> first quarter of 2006, will involve all stakeholders in their
>> respective
>> roles, will proceed as quickly as possible consistent with legal
>> process,
>> and will be responsive to innovation. Relevant organisations should
>> commence
>> a process towards enhanced cooperation involving all stakeholders,
>> proceeding as quickly as possible and responsive to innovation. The
>> same
>> relevant organisations shall be requested to provide annual
>> performance
>> reports.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, as we enter the year 2007, there has been no word, much less
>> action, on the broader issue of developing public policy principles
>> and
>> processes for the Internet, and specifically, the more clearly
>> mandated
>> issue, with timelines, of initiating the 'process towards enhanced
>> cooperation'. As a matter of paramount global public interest, as well
>> as a
>> stated commitment of the WSIS, we, the IGC, as stakeholders of the WSIS
>> and
>> post-WSIS process, request to be informed on the status of these
>> issues, in
>> terms of the action that has been taken, and is intended to be taken.
>>
>>
>>
>> We also wish to claim the full participation of civil society in the
>> envisaged process of 'enhanced cooperation' and other public policy
>> processes, which is implied and mandated in the concerned parts of the
>> Tunis
>> agenda, and we request you to ensure such participation. We note with
>> concern that some parties have tried to claim 'enhanced cooperation' as
>> a
>> government-only process. This is completely at variance with the
>> overall
>> envisaged approach to public policy issues for the Internet (p 60 and
>> 61) as
>> well as in terms of the specific process of 'enhanced cooperation' (p
>> 71).
>> We also offer our complete cooperation, and assistance as may be
>> required by
>> you, for initiating these processes, in order to ensure incorporation
>> of
>> public interest in the development of the most powerful technologies of
>> our
>> times, that holds much promise for just and equitable social change.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanking you.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sincerely
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>>> From: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu]
>>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 6:49 AM
>>
>>> To: ajp at glocom.ac.jp; governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>
>>> Subject: [governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
>>
>>>
>>
>>>>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 12/28/2006 4:17 AM >>>
>>
>>>> Any thoughts on writing to Nitin Desai asking for an update on
>>
>>>> enhanced cooperation? And working on statements/contributions to
>> the
>>
>>>
>>
>>>> February consultation? (about 6 weeks away.)
>>
>>>
>>
>>> I strongly agree with Adam that this is a desirable thing. Enhanced
>>
>>> cooperation, no matter how bullshit a formulation it is, was supposed
>> to
>>
>>> be one of the key outcomes of WSIS, and represents a critical point
>> of
>>
>>> contention between EU and USA.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> There are (legitimate) worries about governments being passive
>> watchers
>>
>>> of IGF "shows", expressed by Jeanette earlier. Enhanced coop is one
>> of
>>
>>> the few areas where state politics can intersect with post-WSIS
>> Forum
>>
>>> politics. At worst, making this inquiry may also bring us face to
>> face
>>
>>> with the possible truth that the govts have no intention of doing
>>
>>> anything and are playing games with WSIS/IGF. If so, we need to call
>>
>>> their bluff
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Where are our coordinators? Wouldn't it be appropriate for them to
>>
>>> initiate action on this, e.g. develop a draft?
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Adam has already laid out the basic outlines of what needs to be
>> said:
>>
>>>
>>
>>>> a letter asking for
>>
>>>> progress/update, why aren't we being told, and we would like to be
>>
>>>> involved. And cc'ing govt and others we know interested to see if
>>
>>>> they will also then ask the same questions might be helpful.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>
>>> 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
*******************************************************
William J. Drake drake at hei.unige.ch
Director, Project on the Information
Revolution and Global Governance/PSIO
Graduate Institute for International Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
http://www.cpsr.org/Members/wdrake
*******************************************************
____________________________________________________________
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
More information about the Governance
mailing list