[governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of 18-19 Summit?

Tue Oct 11 02:17:41 EDT 2011

> Hi,
>
> I agree with Tracy, Marila and Parminder that a poll is premature, seeing
> as we would be placing hard votes on what the proponents are stating is a
> soft and possibly malleable thing, that is, the IBSA proposal; without
> much time for reflection and online discussion here.
>
> But on other hand, I would not belittle our own EC handiwork from 2010,
> which remains imho a substantive contribution to the dialogue. So just
> bringing our '10 formulation of EC alternatives to IBSA's attention is a
> contribution to the current state of play.
>
> Which includes recognition of the IGF as among other things, a place in
> which EC happens.  (So..proponents of EC in UN system should be happy
> since it's already there; and proponents for IG status quo should be happy
> since IGF...well let's just say, it has certain limitations. ; )

some quick comments.

the process of Enhanced cooperation (EC)is specifically to address global
internet related public policy issues. UN now recognizes EC and the IGF as
two 'distinct but complementary' processes. IGF being the forum for wide
policy dialogue and policy influence ensuring the broadest possible
participation. This is also how I see the whole thing. But, in any case,
even some people want to posit the IGF in a more substantive policy role,
they MUST then first tell us how IGF will actually fulfill that role.

The paradox is - those who want to say EC happens in the IGF are also
(with a few exceptions, like you/ Milton) among those who dont want to
change/improve the IGFs processes of substantive 'global' policy related
outcomes. I dont see such a position at all tenable. You cant have the
cake and eat it too.

So, can i request those who want to forward this position of 'EC is
happening in the IGF well enough, and there is no need for any other
institution' to pl spell out their position on how IGF will deliver
'global' policy outcomes, of whatever variety (soft etc). This is
especially relevant for the forthcoming meeting of the CSTD WG on IGF
improvements.

parminder

>
> Seriously, the 2010 statement of IGC on EC should be our own starting
> point, not the particular formulation of an evolving draft from others.
> We should push IBSA towards utilizing our own language and formulations,
> not react to specifics of the IBSA draft without time for much thought or
> reflection. imho.
>
> Lee
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of
> Jeremy Malcolm [jeremy at ciroap.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 8:39 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google
> Subject: Re: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
> 18-19 Summit?
>
> On 11/10/2011, at 1:58 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:
>
> Following on my own informal discussions at the IGF with
> representation from the Brazilian Government and noting the
> willingness of the Brazilians, at least, to discuss, compromise and
> collaborate, I am in support of Marilia's and Parminder's position as
> well as their rationale re: the proposed IGC Response/Statement ...
>
> Then, I don't think we will be able to finish a substantively useful
> statement in time for the IBSA Summit but could only restate the more
> high-level ideas from our enhanced cooperation statement, since our
> collective view has not been much refined since then.  That is OK, because
> it is better to be thoughtful than on time, but if anyone does not wish us
> to miss the opportunity to contribute ahead of the IBSA Summit then please
> help to discuss:
>
> How to respond to each of these assertions?
>
>   *   There is an institutional gap in managing global Internet processes
> and developing policies for Internet at a global level which needs to be
> addressed.
>   *   This requires a new body (outside of the IGF, ITU, OECD, etc.) to
> coordinate and evolve coherent and integrated global public policies
> pertaining to the Internet.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should be located within the UN system.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should develop and establish
> international public policies on cross-cutting Internet-related global
> issues.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should oversee the bodies responsible
> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including
> global standards setting.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should address developmental issues
> related to the Internet.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should undertake arbitration and
> dispute resolution, where necessary.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should be responsible for crisis
> management
>
> If a new body is not formed within the UN system, how else should global
> public policies for the Internet be set, in cases that fall outside the
> competence of any global body?
>
>   *   No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered
> by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
>   *   Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce
> policy options which policy makers (including at the national level) can
> use.
>   *   Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary
> network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
>
> --
>
> Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
> and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
> organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
> movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org<http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
> Twitter @ConsumersInt<http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>
>
> Read our email confidentiality
> notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. 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, 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