[governance] THIRD DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[Lee W McKnight]

Hi again,

Miguel's phrasing and emphases sound pretty good to me; while keeping the list of ideas previously enumerated in the draft.

On a related note,  McTim fears a quagmire if we make (several) suggestions; while I expect a quagmire or at best stagnation if we don't. 

So I am hoping we can reach rough consensus to throw some ideas out there, such as those listed in the Third draft, without at this stage seeking to reach 100% agreement with any one of them.

Lee
________________________________________
From: Miguel Alcaine [miguel.alcaine at gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 9:10 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeremy Malcolm
Subject: Re: [governance] THIRD DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

Dear all,

I have made small suggestions with the intention to strengthen the statement.

Additionally, If you had the opportunity to read what I wrote about "Enhanced Cooperation" (EC) for the preparation of the XII CSTD meeting last may in the website www.cstdn.org<http://www.cstdn.org>, you can see that I believe EC needs at least 2 parts: 1) A favorable environment (organisations which offer a democratic, transparent and multi-stakeholder environment. Democratic meaning participation, accountability and review process on decisions) ; 2) Institutional and personal capacity building, mainly for stakeholders in developing countries. A third possible part is to increase awareness of IG and IG4D, particularly in developing countries.

Do you think is worthwhile to include the ideas above?

Best,

Miguel Alcaine

On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 1:42 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org<mailto:jeremy at ciroap.org>> wrote:
It will be impossible to simultaneously satisfy people like Parminder and people like McTim, so here is my attempt at dissatisfying them equally.  The biggest changes are the substitution of a new preamble for the old one, and deletion of the "do nothing" bullet point under numbered-paragraph 2.  Let's continue to have your comments as we try and reach some common ground.

--- begins ---

The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (CS-IGC) regards the process towards enhanced cooperation as a vital step towards addressing the "many cross-cutting international public policy issues that require attention and are not adequately addressed by the current mechanisms" (Tunis Agenda para 68).

Despite an intergovernmental mandate from WSIS to address this governance deficit, much remains to be done.  It is imperative that this deficit continue to be addressed, where appropriate through new institutional developments that comply with the WSIS process criteria of being multilateral, transparent, democratic and inclusive.

We make three further 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 must play an integral part in them, as one of the prerequisites for their legitimacy.

[COMMENT: Suggested ammendments here is a good place to make the link between enhanced cooperation, multistakeholderism and legitimacy]


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 and the Internet Governance arrangements, 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.

[COMMENT (deletion of ideally): the word ideally weakens the argument, giving the opportunity for others to say that IGF does not take place in an ideal world but in the real world. Therefore, IGF is not capable of helping to shape decisions in other fora.]

There are various, which may complement each other, options for enhancing multi-stakeholder cooperation within and amongst all relevant organisations.  These include:

* 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.

[COMMENT (reasons to suggest the insertion of the phrase about complementarity in the chapeau): option 1 and 2 can be developed together. I believe making the appropriate link between Enhanced Cooperation and IGF is appropriate and convenient, i.e. option 1. To my knowledge, option 1 and 2 look to help to strenghten the democratic, transparent and multistakeholderism features in the different organisations, while option 3 can be seen as more towards the equality among States, although as reflected here, also look to ensure the corresponding participation of all stakeholders.]

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.

--- ends ---

PS. It's entirely possible I have missed some emails.  I'm in Laos with a terrible Internet connection.  I'll catch up and incorporate anything I missed into the fourth draft.

--
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<http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765>. 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