[governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please

Izumi AIZU aizu at anr.org
Thu Jan 11 08:52:29 EST 2007


Parminder, thanks for the further edit.

I think we can send this now.

One minor suggetion is to spell out IGC, and add Civil Society to
make it clear, so "Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (CS-IGC) would
like to..."  reads better.

Thanks,

izumi



2007/1/11, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>:
>
>
>
> 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
>
>


-- 
                      >> 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/20070111/b94d4824/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070111/b94d4824/attachment.txt>


More information about the Governance mailing list