[governance] Re: IGC questionnaire Q2 for review

[William Drake]

Hi Ginger,

The secretariat's questionnaire and the Tunis mandate refer  
specifically to the WSIS principles on Internet governance, not the  
entire Geneva Declaration of Principles on information societies  
generally. As such, the text below is a total non sequitur that will  
leave other parties wondering whether the IGC no longer understands  
the negotiations it has participated in and the positions it has  
advocated for the past seven years.  I oppose including such  
language.  It would be preferable to build off of one of the relevant  
statements on the matter that were laboriously negotiated and approved  
back when more people were participating, but unfortunately we don't  
have a complete archive and I don't have everything saved anymore.   
However, I do see at least one text online that could be adapted, from  
Feb. 2008, www.igcaucus.org/node/8

[The WSIS principles hold that Internet governance processes “should  
be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement  
of governments, the private sector, civil society and international  
organizations.” Governments invoked these principles throughout the  
WSIS process, and in the Tunis Agenda mandated the IGF to, “promote  
and assess, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in  
Internet Governance processes.” 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 government’s  
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 Hyderabad 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.]

We could just delete "To help kick-start that cross-cutting  
consideration, we propose that a main session in Hyderabad" and  
suggest that a process for the ongoing assessment and promotion of  
those principles within IG processes be established, per the Tunis  
mandate.  Could also reference and support the APC/COE/UNECE  
initiative as a building block for such an effort.

If you want to re-pitch a rights framework, it would be better to do  
so in under, "7. Do you have any other comments?"  In that context, it  
might also be good to cite examples that pertain to global Internet  
governance, rather than national policy (or alternatively, to contend  
that relevant issues of national policy like universal access should  
be subjects of GIG, although then presumably we'd have to say how).

Best,

Bill

On Jul 12, 2009, at 3:15 PM, Ginger Paque wrote:

> 2. To what extent has the IGF embodied the WSIS principles?
>
> Principle 1 of the WSIS principles states:* We, the representatives  
> of the peoples of the world*, *assembled in Geneva from 10-12  
> December 2003 for the first phase of the World Summit on the  
> Information Society,* declare our common desire and commitment to  
> build a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented  
> Information Society, where everyone can create, access, utilize and  
> share information and knowledge, enabling individuals, communities  
> and peoples to achieve their full potential in promoting their  
> sustainable development and improving their quality of life,  
> premised on the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United  
> Nations and respecting fully and upholding the Universal Declaration  
> of Human Rights.
>
> A reading of the WSIS principles shows a clear emphasis on Human  
> Rights. Yet the IGF has side-tracked efforts to give rights and  
> principles a significant emphasis in the meeting agenda, allowing a  
> minority of voices to over-ride what is clearly a central obligation  
> of the IGF.
>
> The concept of "rights" should continue to stress the importance of  
> openness and universal access. This framework must continue to  
> emphasize the importance of access to knowledge and development in  
> Internet governance, while adding to it the basic right of  
> individuals to access the content and applications of their choice.  
> This is in keeping with current debates regarding an “open  
> Internet”, and relevant aspects of the often confusing network  
> neutrality discussions.
>
> The inclusion of " rights and principles" allows for wide discussion  
> of the responsibilities that the different stakeholders have to each  
> other. It allows for open examination of the principles that should  
> govern the Internet, particularly in its commercial facets.
>

____________________________________________________________
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