AW: [governance] hearing on Internet Governance arrangements

Tue May 5 17:38:51 EDT 2009

David Goldstein wrote :

<I'd suggest you are unaware of how the EU operates>

Please let Europeans comment freely on THEIR matters. I can assure you, Francis and WE know how our institutions should operate. 

As for me, I 'm just back from the EP sitting and that was quite an interesting day since the morning was spent to the telecom packet debate with no less than four reports on the agenda. Once more, the MEPs of any obedience criticized the absence of the Commission since only Mrs Reding attended the sitting. As for the Council there was nobody ! 

Further I can assure all our list members that the MEPs or their attachés I happened to meet today are angry about the to-morrow Hearing : held in Brussels during the EP plenary session at Strasbourg it's like a provocation by the Commission, especially when one considers that ten days before there was another hearing on the same theme organized by the EP ITRE Committee. There is something going wrong among our institutions ! And it's OUR right to highlight such a misfunctioning.

For all these reasons WE are fed up to be considered as ignorants of OUR institutions by some outsiders (remember the "lessons" given by Roland Perry) . We only try to remind OUR parliamentarians the committment the EU and its members states have signed in Geneva and in Tunis, and what they have decided publicly since then. Further, we ask OUR political institutions (Commision, Parliament and Council) a minimum of respect to the CS -the actual one- and its organizations who are profoundly engaged in the WSIS follow-up process, WITHOUT ANY COMMERCIAL INTEREST, and mostly on their own expenses.

Best
Jean-Louis Fullsack  

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: David Goldstein 
  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org ; Dr. Francis MUGUET 
  Cc: WSIS Civil Soc. WG on Information Networks Governance 
  Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 6:45 AM
  Subject: Re: AW: [governance] hearing on Internet Governance arrangements

  Oh grow up Francis. Just because the EU has an invitation-only event, there's no need for you to sulk. Why not contact the relevant people yourself and question them and make some suggestions.

  Suggesting there are ulterior motives when you have no grounds for such except paranoia is going too far.

  I'd suggest you are unaware of how the EU operates, or government for that matter. Governments regularly consult with people and invite them to discuss issues. We should be pleased the EU is being open with what they are doing.

  David

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: Dr. Francis MUGUET <muguet at mdpi.net>
  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
  Cc: WSIS Civil Soc. WG on Information Networks Governance <gov at wsis-gov.org>
  Sent: Tuesday, 5 May, 2009 11:37:31 AM
  Subject: Re: AW: [governance] hearing on Internet Governance arrangements

  Hello

    In message <49FDDECC.5060004 at mdpi.net>, at 20:13:32 on Sun, 3 May 2009, Dr. Francis MUGUET <muguet at mdpi.net> writes 

      It appears that the call for those hearings has not been inclusive, if 
      not secretive... 
      EU Commission hearing on future Internet Governance arrangement  ( 06 
      May 2009, Brussels, Belgium ) 

    It's not a "call", the meeting is invitation only - which is not itself sinister as the Commission clearly wants to hear from specific organisations and people firmly established in the IG space (and attending IGF meetings is a plausible indication of that). If that doesn't include you, then you should examine why that might be the case. 

  This is twisted non-inclusive arrogant logic, it is not for the uninvited to examine why they are not invited !!!
   but to the organizers and invited ones to ask questions to themselves.... 

  For example, one question is why  Louis Pouzin, one  the very few european internet pioneer is not invited...
  ... but he is invited in Boston... 

  I am raising the question why a few lobbyist firms are invited instead ? 

      For logistical reasons participation is by invitation only. 

    My guess is they couldn't book a bigger room because there's too many other meetings going on that day. 

  You are too kind
  Well, this trick is well known.... this is quite gross...    

      but the call refers to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) ? 

    The original invitation
  It would be interesting if you are kind enough to post the text of this invitation 

    doesn't mention it at all. This meeting is about IG, not the IGF - 

  strange...  the agenda of the 
  EU Commission hearing on future Internet Governance arrangement ( 06 May 2009, Brussels, Belgium ) 
  includes the WSIS in the first place....
  and the WSIS means the IGF !!!

  Hearing on Internet Governance arrangements 
  6 May 2009, 10:00 â€“ 17:15 
  Brussels â€“ Charlemagne Building1, 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/chal enges? 
  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 wil 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 donâ€™t yet have Internet access be represented in the policy making 
  processes and, if so, how? 

    even if the attendees are all IGF veterans. 
  but not WSIS veterans...  by the way, the list of the invited is known to the invited ? 

      The lead towards the EuroIGF. should be taken by all open-minded 
       European stakeholders, involved in the IGF process, 
      whether in person, or remotely. 

    Anyone could start a "EuroIGF", there are <geo-region>IGF's springing up all over the place. All that happened was that Catherine Trautmann won the "first come first served" race for the name.
  Is it like a domain name ? !!! 

    But then nothing much happened (as I have explained before). 

  There are two ways of looking at an IGF in Europe :

  1) An IG Forum of the EU, with its own organization, mandate distinct from the IGF,
  possibly set up by an act of the EU parliament or the EU commission

  2) A subset of the UN IGF whose members are stakeholders from Europe
  ( not only the EU,  but Europe as defined by the Council of Europe ) 

  I would suggest the first one to be called the EuroIGF,
  and the second one the IGF-Europe, they are distinct and complementary,
  and the EuroIGF could fit into the IGF-Europe.

  It is possible that the EuroIGF might have a more stronger, effective
  mandate that the IGF.  This could be quite promising....
  However, the way the EuroIGF is brought to birth raises eyesbrows

  as Meryem observed 
  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. 
  and as Jean Louis  recently posted :
   EU Commissioner Viviane Reding has already worked out the Meeting (draft) Report and proposes it for possible minor amendments and endorsement (see below) by the "invited partipants".

  The EuroIGF process is not starting well, to say the least...

  Civil Society should start to promote ASAP an open, transparent multistakeholder
   IGF-Europe, with all stakeholders, EU or non-EU,  to counterbalance
  the lobbies that seem to have taken control  of the EuroIGF process

  Best

  Francis 

-- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journalshttp://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net

ENSTA/KNIS  http://knis.org
32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE 
Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19  Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 
muguet at ensta.fr   http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org

World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
Civil Society Working Groups
Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chairFinancing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org webInfo. Net. Govermance  :  http://www.wsis-gov.org  webNET4D : http://www.net4D.org UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS : http://www.wtis.org   REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org
------------------------------------------------------ 

Legal notice :
Except stated explicitely,
this message shall not be construed as the official position 
of above mentionned entities

Notice légale ;
A moins que cela ne soit explicitement indiqué,
ce message ne constitue la position officielle
des entités mentionnées ci-dessos
-------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo!7 recommends that you update your browser to the new Internet Explorer 8. Get it now..

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  ____________________________________________________________
  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/20090505/97feeb7d/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