RV: [governance] Statement to OC meeting in May regarding

Jeanette Hofmann jeanette at wzb.eu
Fri Apr 17 09:48:27 EDT 2009


any version sounds fine to me.
jeanette

Milton L Mueller wrote:
> I have not carefully followed the debate leading up to this, but looking at this statement with fresh eyes, I support it! If Jeanette has any further concerns about pre-judging MAG positions, one could simply change "we are concerned at the PROPOSAL..." to "we would not support any proposals..."
> 
> --MM
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> The Internet Governance Caucus notes the statement from the Programme
>> Paper:
>> "....Some favoured the inclusion of 'Internet rights and principles' as a
>> cross-cutting theme". This concurs with the widespread support for this
>> concept from various stakeholder groups at the February open
>> consultations.
>>
>> However we are concerned at the PROPOSAL to exclude it as a theme this
>> year
>> on the grounds that there is "no established definition of this theme and
>> that therefore it should not be discussed at the Sharm El Sheikh meeting."
>>
>> We are surprised by this reasoning for exclusion and request that the MAG
>> revisit this subject given the wide support which has been expressed.
>> Given
>> that these matters are specifically contained in the Tunis Agenda (paras
>> 70
>> and 42) we do not see lack of definition as a reason for exclusion.
>> However,
>> if it is not possible to include this concept until it is defined within
>> IGF, we ask that the IGF 2009 include a prominent plenary space to
>> establish
>> this definition, in preparation for more comprehensive discussions in
>> future
>> debates and meetings.
>>
>> Ginger
>>
>> Ms. Virginia (Ginger) Paque
>>
>> DiploFoundation
>>
>> Coordinator IGCBP 09
>>
>>
>>
>> www.diplomacy.edu/ig
>>
>> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu
>>
>>
>> -----Mensaje original-----
>> De: Carlos Afonso [mailto:ca at rits.org.br]
>> Enviado el: Jueves, 16 de Abril de 2009 08:02 a.m.
>> Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeanette Hofmann
>> CC: Ginger Paque; 'Ian Peter'
>> Asunto: Re: RV: [governance] Statement to OC meeting in May regarding
>> "Internet
>>
>> Jean, the report is not neutral, it reveals an attempted positioning
>> derived from pressures which will continue. This is enough reason to be
>> more proactive and point out the importante of discussing the theme.
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>>> Hi Ginger, as I wrote before (email of late March),
>>>
>>> there is no decision to exclude rights and principles as a theme, and
>>> even less so on the grounds that it is not properly defined. You quote
>>> from a reporting section that summarizes a discussion of the MAG.
>>>
>>> It is important for us to explain why we want to see rights and
>>> principles discussed but we should not generalize or misinterpret the
>>> opinion of a minority of MAG members.
>>>
>>> jeanette
>>>
>>> Ginger Paque wrote:
>>>> Here is a starting draft for discussion, please opine:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Internet Governance Caucus notes the statement from the Programme
>>>> Paper: "....Some favoured the inclusion of 'Internet rights and
>>>> principles' as a cross-cutting theme". This concurs with the
>>>> widespread support for this concept from various stakeholder groups
>>>> at the February open consultations.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> However we are concerned at the decision to exclude it as a theme
>>>> this year on the grounds that there is "no established definition of
>>>> this theme and that therefore it should not be discussed at the Sharm
>>>> El Sheikh meeting."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We are surprised by this reasoning for exclusion and request that the
>>>> MAG revisit this subject given the wide support which has been
>>>> expressed. Given that these matters are specifically contained in the
>>>> Tunis Agenda (paras 70 and 42) we do not see lack of definition as a
>>>> reason for exclusion. However, if it is not possible to include this
>>>> concept until it is defined within IGF, we ask that the IGF 2009
>>>> include a prominent plenary space to establish this definition, in
>>>> preparation for more comprehensive discussions in future debates and
>>>> meetings.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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