[governance] EC recommends a "G12" for IG

[Carlton Samuels]

The exercise of power, "informal" or otherwise, has expression.  And for me,
it is the impact that matters. I doubt if NATO or OPEC are very good
examples of an antithetical G12. In fact, I posit that an "informal" and
"geographically balanced" G12 would look more like a "rump" of the
[economic] G20.

The G12 idea represents EU's impatience with American suzerainty of the
names and numbers system of the Internet. And from where we struggle in the
periphery, it is clear this diverges little from the oft-expressed European
discomfort with the uni-polar post-Cold War political world and how power is
expressed.  Your 2nd paragraph captures this very well.

If the EU's proffer goes forward, all that the G12 would achieve is to
redistribute power in managing the domain name system to the usual suspects
and those countries that are now numbered in the rank of the "deserving
few". For more than many reasons, read the latter to mean and include China
and India.  As I see it, the redistribution would be at the expense of civil
society actors.  But as imperfect as the JPA world is today, there is, at
minimum, notable attempts by ICANN to embrace civil society in its
councils.  And in my view, this development ought to be emphasized, deepened
and institutionalized.

The post-JPA ICANN future is a grand opportunity to reorder our concept of
global governance for what is without doubt global "public goods". But power
is as power does.  This is not a proposal that fundamenally reforms the old
order. Rather, it merely tweaks it at the edge.

Carlton Samuels


On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy <
isolatedn at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello
>
> These are my comments, as an individual:
>
> To progress from G1 to G12 appears to be a good idea. Viviane Reding
> proposes G12 as "an informal group of government representatives that meets
> at least twice a year and can make, by majority, recommendations to ICANN
> where appropriate. To be geographically balanced, this "G-12 for Internet
> Governance" should include two representatives from each North America,
> South America, Europe and Africa, three representatives from Asia and
> Australia, as well as the Chairman of ICANN as a non-voting member.
> International Organisations with competences in this field could be given
> observer status.
>
> The idea is that "it is not defendable that the government department of
> only one country has oversight of an internet function which is used by
> hundreds of millions of people in countries all over the world". At the same
> time, the accountability of ICANN due to its "unique position of a global
> quasi-monopoly... requires global management... [as] monopolies always
> involve the risk of abuse. And who should ICANN be accountable to? Not the
> UN, because "decisions on internet governance need to be taken swiftly".
>
> So a G 12.
>
> The G12 for Internet Governance differs from a NATO or OPEC, as it is
> "informal" and "geographically balanced" with the inclusion of the ICANN
> chairman as a "non-voting" member with "observer" status granted to
> International Organizations.
>
> Good progress. But a move by Governments to take over the Internet? Why
> voting status to the Government 12 and observer status to the International
> Organizations? I would, in my independent opinion prefer an I 12 for
> Internet Governance with the twelve governments as Observers....
>
>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
> http://isocmadras.blogspot.com(the comments above are my own, entirely my
> own, as an individual)
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Meryem Marzouki <marzouki at ras.eu.org>wrote:
>
>> Viviane Reding recommendation on IG:
>> - A fully privatized and independent ICANN
>> - Judicial review (complaints) "by a small, independent international
>> tribunal" (instead of California court)
>> - (Governmental) Oversight by a "G12" (geographically balanced)
>> http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/video/index_en.htm
>>
>> So, progress on multilateral oversight. Business (and when I say business,
>> I really mean the business sector) as usual on other issues. IG seems to be
>> seen as a consumer issue only.
>>
>> Enjoy!
>> Meryem
>>
>> --
>> Meryem Marzouki - http://www.iris.sgdg.org
>> IRIS - Imaginons un réseau Internet solidaire
>> 40 rue de la Justice - 75020 Paris
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090505/162cf41e/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