[governance] enhanced consultations - further inputs

[parminder]

On Thursday 02 December 2010 10:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I find lots of things ironic in the persecution of wikileaks and the upcoming martyrdom of Assange.
>
> I do not find it particularly ironic that a company is pressured to pull down the website in this extreme environment where most all of the countries of the world are screaming for his head and willing to get it in any way they can.
>
> I think it is highly ironic that the first time Interpol cares about a rape, I mean the quest to question someone over a possible case of rape and sexual abuse, enough to make someone Most Wanted.  If only they cared about all possible rapes and cases of sexual abuse with that degree of urgency.  Normally I have a guilty until proven innocent view on accusations of rape (I know, this is a character fault) but in this case the happenstance of the accusations and the wikileaks Iraq papers, and now the ratcheting up when the cables are leaked make me somewhat suspicious.  In fact I see this as terrible gender exploitation by the powers that be.  Can't wait to see the  insanity when they start leaking about the banks, probably accuse him of pedophilia.
>
> To answer your question, i think almost any server in the world would have been pressured to pull down wikileaks pages.  If only there were countries who provided a safe haven for information.  Would Amazon have done if France asked?  Probably - depends on how much of their business the French government can mess with and depends on whether they might be accused of assisting and abetting espionage in French courts.  I even bet that if his server was in India, it would have been pulled down if the India government cared about the leaks and said 'boo'.  And as long as governments insist on their sovereignty, no global central committee for internet governance policy is going to make any difference in this sort of issue.
>    
If you do not want them to misuse their sovereignty claims, especially 
vis a vis matters that are are increasingly of global implication, then 
you need to have alternative globally democratic power (or governance) 
centres. That is what IT for Change's input for enhanced cooperation 
seeks. The sovereignty of countries have been successfully diminished by 
arrangements like WTO and WIPO, though in these cases quite often to the 
detriment to the less powerful countries.

Otherwise things will work through ad hoc use of power, by the law of 
the jungle, as we see in the present instance. If you have raw power you 
can  get things done, if you havent , dont even bother to complaint, 
just understand that is how things are and you better get used to it.

As you would have noticed, our input seeks not only to establish a 
globally democratic governance system for these kinds of cases, but also 
to ensure that it doesnt work arbitrarily, seeking codification of 
principles by which it would work (our framework convention proposal). 
If the global community could agree to codify Human Rights in 1947, I 
trust we can codify good global principles for the Internet in 2010. I 
dont see any reason why we cannot. Though would be happy to hear other 
views on how the situation that we are in at present can be effectively 
addressed.

Parminder


Parminder


> I wonder does anyone care about the content of the cables and what they have to say about various countries' attitudes and positions?
>
> a.
>
> Ps. Then again Palin says he should be hunted like the Taliban.   So what more is there to say!
>
>
> On 2 Dec 2010, at 11:53, Guru गुरु wrote:
>
>    
>> Did you also find it highly ironic that someone who comes across as taking the constant position of govt = evil is able to defend infomation being censored though political pressures that are extra constitutional / beyond processes of law? But both ironies are beside the point.
>>
>> Global public policy mechanisms are required precisely to address this unilateral use of power - if the wikileaks info petained to France or Japan, let alone any developing county, would Amazon have pulled them down?
>> Or are you saying that the unilateral power of USG/US is better than an international structure/process
>> ____________________________________________________________
>>      
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101203/b4fded62/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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t