[governance] SECOND DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[JFC Morfin]

At 15:32 04/11/2010, Lee W McKnight wrote:
>Jeremy,
>Some suggested further tweaking/tightening of language in 1st 2 
>paragraphs....for your 3rd draft
>Lee
>________________________________________
>
>
>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.

Practically, such a process means that some leading stakeholders (in 
this case, some countries) decide to concert more closely on Internet 
issues, paving the way for a general enhancement of the Internet policies.

1. This model is well known : it is the engineers' and manufacturers' 
enhanced cooperation (namely IETF). It builds the Internet for twenty 
four years. This engineering version of the Internet enhanced 
cooperation model is documented by RFC 3935 
(http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3935.txt The mission of the IETF). Most 
of it could directly be transcribed from engineering to governance. 
This would also permit to identify possible subsequent Enhanced 
Cooperations probable problems in transcribing and adapting RFC 3774 
(http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/rfcmarkup.cgi?rfc=3774 IETF 
problem Statement).

2. This Internet Enhanced Technical Cooperation's mission is "to make 
the Internet work better" in producing relevant documents "that 
influence the way people design, use, and manage the Internet in such 
a way as to make the Internet work better".

The main problems we Internet users think it faces are very similar 
to the civil society and governments:
- to define what is their scope, because this means to fully define 
what the Internet is and who they actually are.
- to define what "work better" means for such an Internet.

3. We can observe that the IETF resists for 34 years to governments' 
influence, while ICANN built itself on the GAC and IGF on the MAG. 
This is why the young IUser community is organizing an IUTF/IUSG 
structure, after having clarified responsibility areas with IESG/IAB. 
This is why the CS-IGC should support the emergence of  a comparable 
attitude to balance governmental possible over-influence and area 
trespassing in the Internet Governance are. If some 'doers' are 
interested to work on this kind of influence, time is now. Getting reals.

4. This is obviously not something to discuss in the statement, nor 
even to publicly bootstrap; but a firmer stance based on it could do. 
Instead of "looks forward" perhaps something like "will continue to 
constructively contribute in exploring in cooperation person-centric 
adapted development and protection, spurring innovation emergence and 
co-sponsoring multi-stakeholder debates, testings and deployments". 
The idea is to make them understand that we are real world actors 
they cannot avoid to take into consideration - rather than activists 
they can use as a democratic alibi and forget.

jfc


>We take this opportunity to make three points.
>
>First, enhanced cooperation should encompass all Internet-related 
>public policy issues, second the existing arrangements of relevant 
>organisations (including the Internet Governance Forum) do not fully 
>implement enhanced cooperation, and thirdly 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.  It also reminds us that 
>the ultimate objective of our cooperation is to advance a 
>people-centred, inclusive, development-oriented and 
>non-discriminatory Information Society.
>
>2. The IGF in its present form is a very important part of the 
>enhanced cooperation process, in that ideally its multi-stakeholder 
>process can help to shape decisions 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 other Internet governance organisations that do not 
>already follow this model.
>
>There are various options for enhancing multi-stakeholder 
>cooperation within and amongst all relevant organisations.  These may include:
>
>* making no institutional changes but encouraging organisations to 
>enhance their own cooperation with other stakeholders and to report 
>to the CSTD on their progress;
>* establishing a lightweight multi-stakeholder observatory process 
>perhaps hosted under the auspices of the IGF (pursuant to its 
>mandate in paragraph 72(i));
>* utilising a virtual and voluntary global social community or 
>"social grid", linking together all Internet governance 
>organisations, in which all stakeholders would participate; or
>* establishing a new umbrella governance institution for Internet 
>policy development, with space for the participation of each 
>stakeholder group in its respective role.
>
>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
>
>Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless 
>necessary.
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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

____________________________________________________________
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