[governance] Open consultation

Tue Feb 14 15:19:54 EST 2012

I should have sent this to the list yesterday.

Sorry it's so long.

Deirdre

Comments from me and on submissions made by others:

There  appears to be a need to change perspective. There has been a shift
so that now development is not only an issue between countries – north and
south – but can also be a stratification issue within countries – a rich
developed top layer and a poor underdeveloped lower layer both in the north
and in the south. This needs to be recognised.

Remote participation (RP) needs an improved status. This is both a
technology issue and a recognition issue. The technology must make it
possible, and the recognition should as far as possible give it equal
status. There also need to be excellent remote participation moderators to
act as interface at meetings. And the issue of linguistic inclusion also
needs to be addressed with the possibility of several moderators covering
several different languages. I know this is a lot to ask for but equality
is not just an Anglophone quality. Perhaps initially willing face to face
participants could be ‘conscripted’ to provide inclusion in their various
languages.

ISOC

Remote participation

The growth in the number of remote hubs and the increase of remote
participants that

went with remote hubs is a basis to build on to overcome the challenge and
cost

of travel to attend meetings. – agree 100%

National Regional IGFs

There is a need to enhance the exchange of reports between these two
interfaces to

continue and grow going forward. – definitely – perhaps a mechanism to do
this could be set up – or encouraged and improved?

Funding

This model acts as a feedback mechanism, demonstrating that the IGF is of
value to its participants. – I have grave concerns where value is always
equated with money.

we view the Internet as an enabler for a wide range of human rights, such
as the right to freedom of expression and opinion and access to information
and knowledge as well as the right to association - agree

filtering  be part of  the main agenda of the 2012 IGF. DNS filtering is
increasingly used by governments to combat allegedly illegal online
activities, and this technical measure raises strong concerns, not only
with regard to the underlying Internet architecture, but also with regard
to due legal process and human rights, while not solving the problems at
their source. – this is certainly an issue, but I also find John Carr’s
arguments re blocking in the context of child pornography very convincing.
How to reconcile the unreconcilable?

APC

In Nairobi, a concrete proposal to create a global internet governance body
was put on the

table by governments from developing countries (the IBSA proposal) , which
resulted in

exactly the kind of intense and diverse debate that the IGF was created
for. APC applauds this kind of active agenda-setting of developing
countries as a positive step to counteract exclusion and the predominance
of developed country agendas as the typical starting points for discussion.

However as we see it the question about the best way to discuss development
in relation to internet governance remains unanswered – this is what
triggered my first comment (see above)

(Change the perspective – not so much countries, more social strata)

The need for clearly-defined rules within which to operate, and an
appropriate level of

transparency was also highlighted - yes

if data discrimination for mobile internet is a technical necessity, then
policy-makers must define and clearly outline the principles for governing
such practices. – yes, and there should be general harmonisation of policy
as much as possible.

However, high prices remain a problem.  Electricity is still widely
unavailable and mobile phones are often prohibitively expensive for the
poorest in society, and prices for mobile subscriptions are artificially
high due to licensing fees and competition issues. There is an urgent need
for these critical barriers to universal mobile internet to be addressed
through communications policy and strategy – yes. At least in Saint Lucia
there is a government tax of 15% on mobile services – a very healthy
revenue generator.

the issue of conflict minerals needs to be on the agenda for the next IGF.
Policy-makers must establish clear guidelines and legislation that address
issues of traceability, accountability and responsibility in the mineral
procurement chain.  – this also needs greater public awareness. Can this be
taken together with the issue of ICT waste and recycling?

internet intermediary liability, the impact of restrictions on freedom of
expression and association, and responding to violence against women
online. - yes

freedom of association online needs to be assigned the same level of
importance as freedom of expression has in IGF debates. Indeed the two are
inextricably linked and interdependent. - YES

Balance between intellectual property rights and access to knowledge -YES

Disparities in access between rich and poor, urban and rural areas serve to
exacerbate existing social inequalities. – see my first point above

human rights be the main theme of IGF in 2012 – good idea

internet access as a human right, freedom of expression and freedom of
association.

Human rights topics which became visible for the first time at the IGF
included:

• a human rights approach to mobile

• remedies for internet rights violations

• human rights and corporate responsibility

• the rights of disabled people and young people.

(who speaks for whom? Profile of mag;  consider the person or consider the
ideas; do outward and visible signs automatically contain the inferred
inward and spiritual grace? In other words how to balance the individual
profile of the representative with the broader profile of the constituency
represented)

Human rights is the framework with which we judge the merits of ICT policy.
To us internet governance has to assume a rights-based framework. Business
and technical decisions do not exist in a vacuum; they must be informed and
measured by respect for the rights and wellbeing of the people who will be
using technology

We need more cross-pollination between business, law enforcement, civil
society and the

technical communities.  Rather than talking about each other, we should be
speaking to each other – YES AND YES AND YES

NRO

Remote Participation was improved in 2011 compared to 2010, but there is
still much to be

done to improve this important tool for strengthening accessibility. – see
above

• Continue to encourage Regional Hubs and support greater direct
participation between them

and the IGF sessions in order to allow a bidirectional flow of discussions
– see above

Build a link between Regional IG discussions and the MAG for feedback and
information

Sharing – see above

-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120214/2338018f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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