[governance] hearing on Internet Governance arrangements in

Tue Apr 28 08:07:58 EDT 2009

Hello Jeanette,

Yes, I am relatively free for the next few days to work on a draft. Hope
there is a free argument on before a final draft emerges.

Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
http://isocmadras.blogspot.com

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

> Hi Sivasubramanian Muthusamy,
>
> security and stability is the first item on the agenda, if this can be
> interpreted the way you suggest I don't know.
> If you have the time, why don't you draft a comment? Depending on the
> comments you receive you could submit it as a caucus or an individual
> statement.
> jeanette
>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
>
>> Hello Jeanette Hoffman,
>>
>> The themes for discussion states Security and Stability as a priority and
>> the theme description on Security and Stability is 'leading' ( like a
>> 'leading' question that prompts a desired response). Security and Stability
>> are emphasized, but Privacy is nowhere in view.
>> The theme description on "The Role of Public Authorities" is emphatic as
>> well. I couldn't miss the implication of the question "should
>> self-regulation for critical infrastructures and services be more closely
>> monitored by governments and relevant public authorities?" And in the same
>> passage hints at a possible conclusion "private sector leadership and
>> stronger governmental and public policy making complementary and necessary"
>>
>> The theme description on Accountability and Legitimacy points out that
>> "many Internet users do not participate, even indirectly, in the governance
>> processes" and in the context of the emphasis on security, role of public
>> authorities, private sector leadership, I would take this as an inclination
>> to belittle the users and users' representative groups.
>>
>> Inclusion of "internationalization of Internet Governance" and "Digital
>> Divide", including the question "Should the interests of those who don’t yet
>> have Internet access be represented in the policy making processes and, if
>> so, how?"  are very positive.
>>
>> In the context of the visible mood of the EU to legislate and legislate
>> new rules and more rules on Internet regulation, I am prone to be a little
>> cautious about how the hearings would go.
>>
>> Perhaps the caucus could emphasize that the hearing should redefine its
>> questions on User participation, independent organizations as also include
>> and equally emphasize aspects such as Openness,  Privacy and other core
>> civic values.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>> http://isocmadras.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>    Hi,
>>
>>    the European Commission hosts a hearing on Internet Governance in
>>    Brussels on May 6. It is a by invitation only event. I got an
>>    invitation but cannot attend. Yesterday I was told that we, the IGC,
>>    can send somebody else. Would anybody be able and willing to go?
>>
>>    We are also invited to contribute a written statement on any of the
>>    issues on the agenda. Since there is probably not enough time to
>>    write and agree on a new statement, perhaps it would make sense to
>>    contribute slightly amended version of one of our statements for the
>>    IGF public consultations?
>>
>>    The website for the meeting:
>>
>> http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/internet_gov/index_en.htm
>>
>>
>>    I post the agenda here because it seems to be missing on the website:
>>
>>    Hearing on Internet Governance arrangements
>>    6 May 2009, 10:00 – 17:15
>>     Brussels – Charlemagne Building , Room DURI
>>
>>
>>    09:30 Registration & coffee
>>    10:00 Introduction by the Commission
>>    10.30 WSIS
>>    11.15 Security & stability
>>    12.00 The role of governments
>>    12.45 Round up morning discussion
>>    13.00 Lunch
>>    14.15 Accountability and legitimacy
>>    15.00 Internationalisation of Internet Governance
>>    15:45 Coffee break
>>    16:00 Digital divide
>>    16.45 Round up afternoon discussion
>>    17:00 Concluding remarks
>>
>>    ***
>>    Theme description
>>    1.      WSIS: Progress since WSIS- how far are we with the
>>    implementation of WSIS principles? What are the new challenges, if
>>    any, since WSIS that should be addressed?
>>    2.      Security & stability of the Internet remains a key EU
>>    priority. What are the main threats/challenges? What should the EU
>>    be doing about them in particular with a view to their international
>>    dimension?
>>    3.      The role of public authorities: How should public
>>    authorities, in particular governments, respond to their
>>    responsibilities in view of the importance of the Internet to our
>>    economies and societies? What lessons, if any, should be learnt from
>>    the "financial crisis" (e.g. should self-regulation for critical
>>    infrastructures and services be more closely monitored by
>>    governments and relevant public authorities)? To what extent are
>>    private sector leadership and stronger governmental and public
>>    policy making complementary and necessary components for the
>>    effective management of the Internet?
>>    4.      Accountability and legitimacy: To what extent are
>>    self-regulatory governance bodies accountable to Internet users
>>    world-wide? What problems, if any, are posed by the fact that many
>>    Internet users do not participate, even indirectly, in the
>>    governance processes? Is it necessary to make governance fora more
>>    accountable to the wider international community and, if so, how?
>>    5.      Internationalisation of Internet Governance: Is it desirable
>>    or necessary to ensure fair participation of actors in their
>>    respective roles from all geographic regions in the future shaping
>>    of the Internet and if so, how? How can situations be avoided where
>>    the imposition of a particular legal system or jurisdiction might
>>    disadvantage players from outside the jurisdiction concerned?
>>    6.      Digital divide: The future billions of users will come
>>    largely from developing countries. Should the existing Internet
>>    governance mechanisms be adapted to reflect this evolution and, if
>>    so, how? Should the interests of those who don’t yet have Internet
>>    access be represented in the policy making processes and, if so, how?
>>
>>    jeanette
>>
>>    ____________________________________________________________
>>    You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>       governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>    To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>>       governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>    <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>>
>>    For all list information and functions, see:
>>       http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090428/a7ff81ab/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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