AW: [governance] Internet G8 meeting

[Adam Peake]

The G8 meeting that's a concern seems to be a side event, not part of 
the G8 proper.

See 
<http://gigaom.com/2011/05/02/france-to-internet-g8-will-talk-to-you-for-a-price/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+OmMalik+%28GigaOM%3A+Tech%29>

All the same, it's pretty offensive.

G8 in Okinawa/DOT Force did set some precedent for multi-stakeholder 
involvement so the situation in France now more than a decade later 
is a very great shame to see.  Like many first steps DOT Force was 
hesitant and very far from ideal, but things have to start 
somewhere/somehow.  The non-governmental stakeholders were hand 
picked by their respective G8 governments (GLOCOM was the Japanese 
rep.)  Developing country membership was very limited (Egypt, 
Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania), but their involvement was also a 
little unique at the time.  Looking back the recommendations were 
naive. And it was undone by changes in government (Clinton to Bush), 
and by moving things to the largely ineffectual UNICT Task Force.

FWIW the action item we worked on below. Now 10 years on.

France G8: Sarkozy and Internet Freedom just screams oxymoron.

Adam



AP5. Establish and Support Universal Participation in
Addressing New International Policy and
Technical Issues raised by the Internet and ICT
a) Support should be provided for developing country stakeholders --
governments, private companies, NPOs, citizens and academics-- to better
understand global Internet and other ICT technical and policy issues and to
participate more effectively in relevant global fora;
b) The resource network identified in Action Point 1 should provide information
on decisions that will be taken at such fora, an open platform for papers by
experts, and facilitation of the exchange of views;
c) Support a network of Southern-based expertise - which could access the
resource network identified in Action Point 1- to support the representatives
of developing countries as they seek to participate effectively in these fora
and address these issues in their own context;
d) Global policy and technical fora and organizations working on 
Internet and ICT
issues should make a special effort to bring representatives of 
developing nations
into their discussions and decision-making processes;
e) The United Nations ICT Task Force should be encouraged in its stated goal
of identifying options for involving developing country stakeholders in these
new issues.



>On Thursday 05 May 2011 01:58 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 05 May 2011 14:43:18 +0700, Norbert Klein 
>><mailto:nhklein at gmx.net><nhklein at gmx.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>There seems to be agreement that the IGC should respond (and I 
>>concur with this).  I would like to invite Wolfgang or Parminder to 
>>volunteer to write a first draft.  If they do not have time, I 
>>should be able to put something together as a draft based on their 
>>contributions to the list.
>>
>>
>>
>While I can try to put together some text, i am not sure what really 
>do we want to say. If it is *only* an appeal to make the G 8 meeting 
>more multistakeholder, as I have argued earlier, I am not 
>interested. For me, our communication should clearly make the point 
>that in any discussion on the kind of issues that the G8 meeting is 
>taking up, all countries must be included on an equal footing. And 
>this is best done in a UN forum rather than at such meeting of most 
>powerful nations. We can refer to the inherently global nature of 
>the Internet and how policy decisions taken by the most powerful 
>countries by default largely become applicable to the whole world.
>
>We can then refer to the institutional forms that have been mandated 
>by the WSIS - enhanced cooperation and the IGF, and refer to 
>subsequent UN Gen Assembly  resolutions that the two processes are 
>complementary. Thus any global public policy development should not 
>only involve all countries and all stakeholders, it should also 
>always and continually remain connected to the IGF as the agora 
>where public opinion on key IG issues is formed and shared. 
>Something to this effect.
>
>Now, if these elements look ok, I can do some drafting. Thanks, Parminder
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
>To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
>For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
>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, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t