[governance] IGC statement REVISION 2.0: Para one

[McTim]

Hi,

On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Katitza Rodriguez
<katitza at datos-personales.org> wrote:
> Mc Tim:
>
> I opposed to the following statement:
>
> On Jan 16, 2010, at 11:48 PM, McTim wrote:
>
>>  we have no
>> objection to the notion of an IGF independent of the UN system.
>
>
> We are working here towards upholding human rights on the Internet. The UN
> charter commits the United Nations and all Member States to action promoting
> "universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental
> freedoms" (art. 55 / inc. c)).
>
> This is the second time I heard this argument.
>
> I look forward to hear your opinion (and other opinions) on these topic

My rationale is that IF (and its a big if indeed) the mandate of the
IGF is not renewed by the UN, it gives us as CS the option to carry on
the IGF ourselves as a CS organisation.  My formulation was keeping
Sivas position in mind (as well as mine and I think others).

Are you opposed to this possibility if the mandate is not renewed?

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
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