[governance] Very neutral statement on enhanced cooperation

JFC Morfin jefsey at jefsey.com
Tue Nov 2 21:19:35 EDT 2010 

Dear Jeremy,

Actually, your document is clear, comprehensive, and matter of fact, 
but I am afraid it is not neutral. The reason that is the case is 
that currently the focus is on "enhanced cooperation", while it 
should rather be on "public".

A.  To better understand my point, let us take the European 
definition of "enhanced cooperation" per the Lisbon Treaty: 
<http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/enhanced_cooperation_en.htm>http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/enhanced_cooperation_en.htm.

This definition (also mutually adopted by governments) definitely 
conflicts with the Tunis Agenda.

Merging them clarifies the issue:
- The European definition states that some countries can enhance 
their cooperation on a case by case basis
- The Tunis definition states that governments are to be on equal footing.

This can only be conciliated if one only selects those cases where 
all governments are on equal footing.

1) Tunis identified two such areas:
- your narrow issue of internationalizing the oversight of the 
Internet naming and numbering functions
- art. 71: to be responsive to innovation (i.e. supposedly identified 
emerging enhancements).

2) and it determined what an enhanced cooperation should bring to 
governments in these areas: a better understanding and definition of 
globally-applicable principles on public policy issues that are 
associated with the coordination and management of critical Internet 
resources (Art. 70).


B.  This shows that all of this was understandable in the Tunis 
initial context but that it is meaningless because it is incoherent 
with the desired innovation, i.e. the enhancement of the world 
digital ecosystem that supports what is to be a societal evolution.
- WSIS is about information society, and enhanced cooperation is 
about its public issues (dynamic into the future)
- What is defined hereinabove regards the Internet and governments 
(stability from the past).

The emergence of innovation that the IGF has more or less reported 
makes "enhanced cooperation over the world digital ecosystem network 
public issues" different from "governments' deeper views on the 
Internet". This is why "enhanced cooperation must encompass all 
Internet-related public policy issues" was fully acceptable in an 
ICANN/ISOC/IETF pre-WSIS GAC meeting, but then becomes biased towards 
a political and technological status quo in a today's civil-society statement.


C.  We, therefore, must start questioning every involved topic:

- what is the world digital ecosystem (WDE) that the WSIS has enlightened?
- what is the WDE network (WDEN)?
- what are the WDEN related "public issues"?
- from the identification of these "public issues", what are the 
regalian digital functions?
- how better can these regalian digital functions be cooperated?
- how can this be applied to particular cases, such as the Internet? 
The IETF mission is to influence those who design, use, and manage 
the Internet for it to work better. How will a better cooperated 
regalian digital function participate in the Internet enhancement? 
What is to be the role that is to be acknowledged to civil society in 
this process? (I note that in this particular Internet example, the 
non-Tunis identified and the prevalent Internet users' community 
entered the IETF process through a young but formalized and quite 
active IUCG [Internet Users Contributing Group], and maintains a 
civil society related section 
(http://iucg.org/wiki/Translating_Civil_Society_preocupations).


D.  The reason why I think this issue is a major one and must 
seriously be addressed is that what is at stake is the replacement of 
the "modern State" that we inherited from the book and that we now 
adapt to the digital network context. In particular, experience shows 
(GAC at ICANN) that enhanced cooperation has to be reached by 
specialized points of enhanced cooperation, or enhanced 
cooperations  (as organizations) on specialized topics, in turn 
structurally completing the thematic dynamic coalitions.

The only existing one that we can observe is precisely the 
ICANN/GAC/ISOC/IETF/IANA enhanced cooperation. The consideration of 
this enhanced cooperation structure, which is not prepared to face 
the emergence of innovation in the use of the Internet (naming, 
presentation layer, addressing, IPv6, etc.), shows that the digital 
community requires a better understanding of what the World Digital 
Ecosystem Network is and what its critical resources truly are. This 
also questions the IGF as an observatory of the emergence of digital 
evolution, and the lack of a technical evolution matching process by 
a missing World Digital Ecosystem Governance.

This has to be clearly reported to the UN General Secretary for the 
upcoming governmental UNDEP consultation on enhanced cooperation. 
IMHO, this also calls for a third WSIS meeting, in a few years time, 
when governments have, individually and in cooperation, assimilated 
and validated the points described hereinabove.

Regards.
jfc


At 14:31 02/11/2010, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>We haven't, by any means, had enough discussion on the table yet to 
>be close to settling a statement on enhanced cooperation for the 
>upcoming UNDEP consultation on that topic, due this month.  But 
>since we made such noise about non-governmental stakeholders being 
>excluded from that consultation, it would be a shame if in the end 
>we had nothing to contribute.
>
>So, to stimulate a bit more discussion, I've drafted a very neutral, 
>uncontentious and short statement on enhanced cooperation that, 
>based on your feedback, can hopefully be beefed up into something 
>worth submitting on behalf of the IGC.  Here it is:
>
>"The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (CS-IGC) is pleased to 
>present its views on the process towards enhanced cooperation on 
>international public policy issues relating to the Internet.  We do 
>not have any detailed prescription of the form which this process 
>should take, but rather we take this opportunity to make three simple points.
>
>First is that enhanced cooperation must encompass all 
>Internet-related public policy issues, second that the existing 
>arrangements of relevant organisations (including the Internet 
>Governance Forum) do not adequately implement this ideal of enhanced 
>cooperation, and finally that whatever new arrangements may be put 
>in place, civil society will play an integral part in them.
>
>These points will be explained in turn:
>
>1. Although much of the discussion of enhanced cooperation at WSIS 
>turned around the narrow issue of internationalising the oversight 
>of Internet naming and numbering functions, the Tunis Agenda 
>expresses this principle far more broadly to encompass all existing 
>Internet governance arrangements (see particularly paras 58-60 and 69).
>
>2. The IGF in its present form is a very important part of that 
>process, in that its multi-stakeholder process can help to shape the 
>decisions that are taken on Internet related public policy issues in 
>other fora.  However the full realisation of enhanced cooperation 
>will require a multi-stakeholder process to extend to those other fora also.
>
>There are various options for enhancing multi-stakeholder 
>cooperation within and amongst all relevant organisations, ranging 
>from a new umbrella governance institution, to a more lightweight 
>multi-stakeholder observatory process perhaps hosted under the 
>auspices of the IGF (pursuant to its mandate in paragraph 72(i)).
>
>3. Paragraph 71 of the Tunis Agenda makes very clear that civil 
>society is an integral participant in the development of any process 
>towards enhanced cooperation.  Therefore the IGC, in our capacity as 
>members of civil society, looks forward to contributing 
>constructively in transparent, accountable and democratic 
>multi-stakeholder consultations towards this end."
>
>--
>
>Jeremy Malcolm
>Project Coordinator
>Consumers International
>Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
>Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala 
>Lumpur, Malaysia
>Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
>CI is 50
>Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer 
>movement in 2010.
>Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect 
>consumer rights around the world.
><http://www.consumersinternational.org/50>http://www.consumersinternational.org/50
>
>Read our 
><http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765>email 
>confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101103/f3598ae8/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

More information about the Governance mailing list