[governance] FINAL? DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[Lee W McKnight]

+1 for open
________________________________________
From: Avri Doria [avri at psg.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 10:42 AM
To: IGC
Subject: Re: [governance] FINAL? DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

On 10 Nov 2010, at 09:40, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:

> 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.
>
> It is now especially critical that the global community give renewed attention to these principles, at a time when we see danger of them being forgotten - for example, in that a proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement that will affect Internet users around the world (including the most marginalized), has been shaped almost entirely by powerful corporate and state actors from the global North.
>

I have two recommendations:

1.

> continue to be addressed, where appropriate through new institutional developments that

This seems to imply that new institutional developments are required, as opposed to allowable if appropriate.

i think it might read better as:

continue to be addressed through the existing institutions, and where appropriate through new institutional developments, that ....

2.

the ACTA stuff is actually multi-lateral as it is occurring between states.  and I understand that WSIS went with multilateral as opposed to a wider more inclusive formulation. But why does the IGC want it to be multi-lateral, i.e. giving primacy to governments, when that can deliver results we find abominable.

I would recommend replacing:

> the WSIS process criteria of being multilateral, transparent, democratic and inclusive.

with

the accepted process criteria of being open, accountable, transparent, democratic and inclusive.

I think it reasonable that the IGC try to push beyond the WSIS criterion of multi-lateraisml that leaves decisions primarily in governments hands, while recognizing that of course governments are included as we say it should be inclusive.  Please note that I have refrained from using the multistakeholder moniker for this process to avoid offending those who have a different definition of it than i do.

a.


____________________________________________________________
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