[governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] programme

[Vittorio Bertola]

Adam Peake ha scritto:
> I don't see any CS theme being lost, just a re-working of the five 
> simple catch-all themes. They were getting tired, many comments asked 
> for something new. The main sessions in Rio were generally pretty dull.  
> So we have the new format of main workshops/main debates.

The idea of "main workshops" is a good one, but I am afraid that given 
the summarization of themes there will be no rights-related workshop 
among the main ones... I assume that main workshops will be related to 
main themes, and if you consider the exploded list of issues:

>>>  - Reaching the next billion
>>>
>>>  ** Access
>>>
>>>  ** Multilingualism.
>>>
>>>  - Promoting cyber-security and trust
>>>
>>>  ** Are we losing the battle against cyber-crime?
>>>
>>>  ** Fostering security, privacy and openness
>>>
>>>  - Managing critical Internet resources
>>>
>>>  ** Transition from IPv4 to IPv6.
>>>
>>>  ** Arrangements for Internet governance - global and national/regional.
>>>
>>>  - Taking Stock and the Way Forward
>>>
>>>  - Emerging issues.

there is zero instances of the word "rights", zero instances of the word 
"freedom", and there is just one mention of "privacy" and "openness" 
(still a pretty much undefined concept), as one half of a sub-item whose 
other half is "security", a traditionally opposite theme which is 
repeated again with different words as the first sub-item of the same 
group ("are we losing the battle...") and is repeated again twice 
("security" and "trust") in the main title of the group. I think that 
the message from the MAG is clear!

Maybe it's just a matter of wording and won't change much in practice, 
but this really looks like a devastating defeat for those of us who have 
been spending the last three years trying to push a "rights agenda" for 
the IGF and the Internet, and now get an agenda that doesn't even have 
the words "rights" or "freedoms" in it, not even at the most minor level.

Specifically, the Bill of Rights coalition, in the output of the last 
workshop, openly asked for "Internet rights" to become one of the main 
themes in India. This was recognized (also explicitly supported by some) 
in the concluding main session in Rio. We had a written declaration by 
two governments, one of which was the last host country, supporting this 
proposal. We had an international conference in Rome last September, 
with official delegations from 50+ countries and attendees from 70+ 
countries, supporting this request. At both IGFs our workshop was among 
the most attended ones, and while there were different views on the 
instruments, everyone agreed that this is a fundamental issue for the 
future of the Internet.

So could the MAG please tell us how our request was considered, why it 
was rejected, and why our themes were so much marginalized in the 
overall agenda?

Thanks,
-- 
vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
-------->  finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/  <--------
____________________________________________________________
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