AW: [governance] hearing on Internet Governance arrangements
Jeanette Hofmann
jeanette at wzb.eu
Thu Apr 30 06:22:02 EDT 2009
Hi, in case I caused a misunderstanding I'd like to point out that the
Commission did not invite the caucus per so to present a statement. I
was told that I could suggest someone else in place of me. This is why
suggested that a member of the caucus might want to go. Independently of
that, I also asked if the caucus wants to submit a statement. If we have
no statement, we, or more precisely one of us, can still make use of the
empty seat.
jeanette
Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>
> My understanding from the EU meeting is that this is more a "brainstorming" than a formal hearing where people present "positions". There will be several people from the Caucus on the table. I do not see a need at this point to present a formal IGC statement, but it would be good if the various IGC members participate actively in the brainstorming also by making clear that they are linked to the IGC, which would be good to show other stakeholders, that the IGC is a active stakeholder, has good ideas and good people. I will be there, will speak as an individual expert but will make clear that CS and the IGC should be adequatly (in its respectuive role) in the future activities.
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> Gesendet: Do 30.04.2009 11:54
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
> Cc: Christopher Wilkinson; Jeanette Hofmann
> Betreff: Re: [governance] hearing on Internet Governance arrangements in
>
>
> Ian and Ginger,
>
> Will due respect and thankfulness to Christopher's kind offer I am unable to clearly understand what would representing IGC at this meeting mean? I therefore request further clarity on this.
>
> The questions posed by EU are all very important issues with deep implications for the IG arena. I am not sure (1) if IGC has formed relatively clear and expressable views on these issues, and (2) even if it has done so in its earlier statements, how these views will be read and communicated.
>
> It is my view that IGC being represented by Christopher, who presumably has been invited in his capacity as the chair of ISOC-EU, will create some amount of confusion, without gaining anything substantial. It is important to note in this regard that OECD (and presumably EU, which consists of countries that are an important part of OECD) see ISOC chiefly to be from the technical community constituency, and recently it has created separate technical community and civil society constituencies in relation to its information society activities. IGC is of course seen to be from the civil society constituency. While I agree that ISOC has important CS aspects, we are working within a somewhat well established nomenclature/ categorization in this space and it is in our best interest to respect that for the present purpose.
>
> I would however very much like it if Christopher as an active IGC member can share information with us on what transpires at the meeting.
>
>
> Parminder
>
> Ian Peter wrote:
>
> I've discussed with Ginger and unless there are strong objections we
> recommend that we take up Christopher's offer to represent IGC at this
> event.
>
> As regards a statement - current statements are all on line at
> www.igcaucus.org <http://www.igcaucus.org/> (there is a page dedicated to these). That's probably a
> good starting point.
>
>
>
> On 28/04/09 10:34 PM, "Christopher Wilkinson"
> <christopher.wilkinson at skynet.be> <mailto:christopher.wilkinson at skynet.be> wrote:
>
>
>
> Well, Jeanette, I don't know who has been invited ...
>
> I think that what I have had to say on behalf of ISOC-ECC is already on
> the record, so if IGC so wishes, I could also speak to the points that
> we might wish to make. I suggest that we follow your suggestion: (a)
> edit appropriately an IGC statement and post it to the EC website - I
> imagine that the original authors would like to do that (by tomorrow?),
> and (b) prepare a few key points for a 5 minute (max) intervention.
> Depending on who else is present, we could arrange on the spot who
> actually speaks to these points.
>
> If IGC wishes to fill the available IGC place, OK.
>
> CW
>
>
>
> Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>
>
> Hi Christopher,
>
> you are probably attending on an ISOC ticket?
> I've been told there is one place left we can fill.
> As usual, no funding available.
> jeanette
>
> Christopher Wilkinson wrote:
>
>
> Dear Jeanette:
>
> I plan to go to this event. ISOC-ECC has submitted our presentation
> to the European Parliament Hearings on 15 April.2009, attached.
>
> Regards to you all,
>
> Christopher.
>
> ----------------------------
>
> Jeanette Hofmann 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 ñ 17:15
> Brussels ñ 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 donít 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
> 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