[governance] FINAL? DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[Fouad Bajwa]

Hi Parminder,

I too join your concern as well as believe in what you have termed as
the paradox. I have a feeling that this statement is just for the sake
of a statement but it represents our views of how confused we are in
terms of what is really required and what really affects us in the
developing world.

It is interesting that how we even as members within IGC try to move
towards and believe in a direction that is not possible nor workable
and are looking forward to waste another 5 years discussing something
that will take no other form out of what it is at the moment now.
Either we have members whose interests oppose to why we people from
the developing world gather here in the spirit for what IGC exists for
or we have certain actors here who have backgrounds that are in
conflict of interest to the IGC charter.

An open, new and inclusive institutional framework for evolving global
IG related public policies with the opportunity to be democratic in
inclusion of all countries and stakeholders will have to be advocated
separate from existing silos like OECD and the expectation of IGF to
evolve into one?

Despite there is an OECD's Committee For Information, Computer and
Communication Policy with an active portfolio for helping develop
Internet policies (as you mentioned esp those with trans-border
ramification) I donot believe this has been totally beneficial to us
developing world countries. Its one directional policy development and
policy instruments in which no developing country has direct consent
or consensus of formulation and implementation.

Furthermore, despite the fact that many CS members in the IGC actively
associate with the work of the mentioned OECD institutional framework
and I was also present at the OECD ministerial in Seoul, I am sorry to
say that much of the work is related to the policy advocacy agenda's
of certain organizations and not wholly directed at any direct
intervention on any developing issue in our developing world. Just to
give you an idea, I couldn't even register for many days because the
Pakistan record was no where in their participants database for
participating countries.

Anyways, I had earlier sent a message on the issue with regards to
using Pakistan as a litmus test but received no response on it because
we don't want to look back and rectify what damage has already been
done and want to move into the future with policy frameworks and
institutions developed with a totally different social and economic
model in our mind.

I support your call for addressing the urgent need for global Interent
related public policies.and am disappointed with the IG current
statement on EC as it represents only views that are not reflecting
what the developing world needs but what certain minds need to see,
debate, write books and papers about wheres we are left to suffer
because an improvement could happen but the global intellect couldn't
see it.


---- Fouad Bajwa


On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 4:25 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> Hi All
>
> I am still not able to understand how so many of those who are against any
> new institutional framework for evolving global IG related public policies,
> which is democratic in inclusion of all countries and stakeholders,  have
> enthusiastically supported a similar framework among OECD countries? I mean
> the OECD's Committee For Information, Computer and Communication Policy,
> which has a very active portfolio for helping develop Internet policies, esp
> those with trans-border ramification. Many CS members in the IGC have
> actively organized themselves to associate with the work of this OECD's
> institutional framework.
>
> Why should such a framework not exist at a global level? And I do think that
> OECD's framework is not multistakeholder enough. My proposal is for a global
> framework of similar kind (to OECD's) that will help develop globally
> applicable Internet related public policies, which is what the 'enhanced
> cooperation' process is about, that is much more multistakeholder than the
> existing OECD one
>
> I request a specific response for those who have supported the OECD
> framework rather enthusiastically, and this includes most here on the IGC
> list who now oppose similar new institutional developments at the global
> level , how do they justify this opposition now, for a similar global
> institutional framework.
>
> Unfortunately, many developing country IGC members here have gone along with
> this opposition to a global UN anchored body, which can be  no different
> from the OECD arrangement. I am able to unserstand thier stanc eeven more.
>
> Should we depend on OECD to make global Internet policies. That is what is
> being said in this support for a OECD framework but opposition to a similar
> global framework one, for addressing the urgent need for global Interent
> related public policies. .
>
> For this reason I cannot support the present draft statement. But if someone
> can give me some justification clarifying the above paradox, I am very much
> willing to listen.
>
> Parminder
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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