[governance] Main session proposals on DA and WSIS Principles

[Adam Peake]

>Hi,
>
>Per Parminder¹s request, I¹ve drafted some 
>language on two possible main session topics. 
> In both cases, I took note of the Swiss 
>statement.  One could argue either way the 
>politics of doing that, but ultimately I thought 
>it¹s sensible to clearly make the linkage so the 
>proposals are framed in subsequent discussion as 
>a MS intervention rather than just some CS 
>thing.  If OfCom¹s not shy about supporting our 
>proposals, why should we be shy about doing the 
>same?  Also, on the WSIS principles piece, I 
>suggest narrowing the focus this time in a way 
>that makes the issues and politics more 
>manageable.  Several years of experience raising 
>this with IGF leadership and at ITU and OECD 
>meetings, etc. lead me to believe that the 
>camel¹s nose would be more less unwelcome in the 
>tent if it looks like transparency and inclusion 
>rather than ³everything should be multilateral² 
>or ³let¹s rehash WSIS² etc.
>
>Thoughts, suggestions, corrections of my false 
>consciousness and running dog lackey ways, etc?
>
>BTW re: one other point raised prior, I would 
>suggest that we not propose a main session on 
>the IGF mandate, but rather hold off for another 
>IGC workshop instead---second in a branded 
>series, the first having gone well and not led 
>the sky to fall etc.  I can¹t imagine key 
>players welcoming the possibility of a main 
>session hullabaloo on that.


I think we should recommend including discussion 
of the mandate within the "Taking stock and the 
way forward" session and some associated 
workshops.  Important we start looking at what's 
been achieved and to prepare for discussion about 
the desirability of continuing the Forum beyond 
2010.  There could be a call for workshops on 
topics from the mandate not yet addressed (or not 
the subject of other sessions) and the second in 
the "branded" series.

Adam


>Cheers,
>
>Bill
>
>
>A Development Agenda for Internet Governance
>
>Development is a key focus of the Tunis Agenda 
>and its mandate for the IGF.  Development also 
>was listed as a cross-cutting theme of the 
>Athens and Rio conferences, but neither featured 
>a main session that devoted significant, focused 
>attention to the linkages between Internet 
>governance mechanisms and development.  However, 
>at Rio a workshop was organized by civil society 
>actors in collaboration with the Swiss Office of 
>Communications and other partners from all 
>stakeholder groupings on, ³Toward a Development 
>Agenda for Internet Governance.²  The workshop 
>considered the options for establishing a 
>holistic program of analysis and action that 
>would help mainstream development considerations 
>into Internet governance decision making 
>processes. Attendees at this workshop expressed 
>strong interest in further work on the topic 
>being pursued in the IGF.  Hence, we believe the 
>Development Agenda concept should be taken up in 
>a main session at New Delhi, and that this would 
>be of keen interest to a great many participants 
>there.  We also support the Swiss OfCom¹s 
>proposal to consider establishing a 
>multi-stakeholder Working Group that could 
>develop recommendations to the IGF on a 
>development agenda.
>
>
>Transparency and Inclusive Participation in Internet Governance
>
>The WSIS principles hold that Internet 
>governance processes ³should be multilateral, 
>transparent and democratic, with the full 
>involvement of governments, the private sector, 
>civil society and international organizations.² 
>Governments invoked these principles throughout 
>the WSIS process, and in the Tunis Agenda 
>mandated the IGF to, ³promote and assess, on an 
>ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles 
>in Internet Governance processes.² 
> Nevertheless, the IGF has not held any 
>follow-up discussion on how to pursue this key 
>element of its mandate.  The Internet Governance 
>Caucus has consistently advocated programmatic 
>activity in this arena, and hence welcomes the 
>Swiss OfCom¹s statement that implementation of 
>the WSIS principles should be added as a 
>cross-cutting issue at the core of all IGF 
>discussions.  To help kick-start that 
>cross-cutting consideration, we propose that a 
>main session in New Delhi concentrate on two 
>WSIS principles of general applicability for 
>which progress in implementation can be most 
>readily assessed: transparency, and inclusive 
>participation.  The session could consider 
>patterns of practice across Internet governance 
>mechanisms, and identify generalizable lessons 
>concerning good or best practices.
>
>
>***********************************************************
>William J. Drake  
>Director, Project on the Information
>   Revolution and Global Governance/PSIO
>Graduate Institute of International and
>   Development Studies
>Geneva, Switzerland
>william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
>***********************************************************
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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