[governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
Izumi AIZU
aizu at anr.org
Tue Jan 9 11:58:15 EST 2007
Thank you Parminder for your extensive work.
Though I like the explanatory and diplomatic introduction of yours,
I tend to agree with what Milton, Adam and Bill said.
The shorter concise one to send it quickly will be more effective
this time I think.
thanks,
izumi
2007/1/10, William Drake <drake at hei.unige.ch>:
>
> 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
>
>
--
>> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for HyperNetwork Society
Kumon Center, Tama University
* * * * *
<< Writing the Future of the History >>
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070110/73e81ab6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070110/73e81ab6/attachment.txt>
More information about the Governance
mailing list