[governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
Adam Peake
ajp at glocom.ac.jp
Wed Jan 10 11:17:13 EST 2007
my email overlapped. Clearly I agree with sending the text.
Adam
>We still wait for more comments/ suggestions on the proposed letter to Nitin
>Desai on enhanced cooperation. Meanwhile, I have tried to pull the texts
>proposed by Milton and Bill together. To this text I have added the fact of
>the mandate of the Tunis agenda in para 1 (para 2 from Bill already had such
>a mention)
>
>The proposed text is
>
>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 'enhanced cooperation' on international public policy issues
>related to the Internet, as required by the paragraph 71 of the Tunis
>agenda.
>
>The IGC would very much appreciate an update on progress and news of the
>current state of play with respect to "enhanced cooperation". In particular,
>we would welcome information on a)any concrete steps taken so far, like, 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 involving civil society in the process per the clear mandate
>in paragraph 71.
>
>(ends)
>
>
>Parminder
>
>________________________________________________
>Parminder Jeet Singh
>IT for Change, Bangalore
>Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
>Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
>Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
>www.ITforChange.net
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:03 PM
>> To: Parminder; 'Milton Mueller'; governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> Subject: RE: [governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
>>
>> At 12:36 PM +0530 1/10/07, Parminder wrote:
>> > > 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.
>> >
>> >Is it generally known that Secy Gen did ask Nitin Desai to begin
>> >consultation? ( I, for instance, did not know) Should we proceed from
>> >this...
>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> UN press release announcing set up of the IGF secretariat and enhance
>> cooperation
>> <http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sgsm10366.doc.htm>. Relevant
>> part:
>>
>> "On a separate issue, the Secretary-General has also decided to ask
>> Mr. Desai to consult informally on how to start a process aimed at
>> enhancing cooperation on international public policy issues related
>> to the Internet. The Summit had requested the Secretary-General to
>> start such a process. "
>>
>> The words suggested for the question in the letter reflected this.
>> (and also one reason I think just asking the simple question is
>> best... but as said, more is OK if that's what all want.)
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>> >Parminder
>> >
>> >________________________________________________
>> >Parminder Jeet Singh
>> >IT for Change, Bangalore
>> >Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
>> >Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
>> >Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
>> >www.ITforChange.net
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller at syr.edu]
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 7:53 PM
>> >> To: ajp at glocom.ac.jp; parminder at itforchange.net;
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please
>> >>
>> >> 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
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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
More information about the Governance
mailing list