[governance] UN GA resolution and enhanced cooperation

[Norbert Bollow]

Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> Enclosed is the 2011 UN GA resolution on ICTs for development. Its most 
> hotly contested part was of course about 'enhanced cooperation', a 
> term/issue that so many hope should somehow simply disappear and die. 
> The relevant part of the resolution reads as follows;
> 
>     .... invites the Chair of the Commission on Science and Technology
>     for Development to convene, in conjunction with the fifteenth
>     session of the Commission, a one-day open, inclusive and interactive
>     meeting, involving all Member States and other stakeholders,
>     particularly those from developing countries, including the private
>     sector, civil society and international organizations, with a view
>     to identifying a shared understanding about enhanced cooperation on
>     public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, in accordance with
>     paragraphs 34 and 35 of the Tunis Agenda.....

Parminder, many thanks for posting this!

I'd suggest that regardless of whatever negative thoughts we may have
had on bad developments that can potentially happen under a heading
of "enhanced cooperation", let's make sure to have a strong civil
society participation in that consultation meeting.

It seems that the UN GA's understanding of "enhanced cooperation" is
still primarily a heavy handed viewpoint that governments should have
power over all Internet related matters over which they want to have
power, excepting only "the day-to-day technical and operational
matters that do not impact upon those issues", as written among the
introductory recallings:

  /Reiterating/ the significance and urgency of the process towards
  enhanced cooperation in full consistency with the mandate provided
  in the Tunis Agenda and the need for enhanced cooperation to enable
  Governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and
  responsibilities in respect of international public policy issues
  pertaining to the Internet but not in respect of the day-to-day
  technical and operational matters that do not impact upon those
  issues,

While I view this as unduly heavy-handed, the underlying desire is
IMO legitimate to some extent.

I would suggest that we should use the time until those consultations
in May to figure out appropriate, nuanced positions and proposals on how
the legitimate needs of governments can be met without increasing the
risks for human rights violations by giving undue power to governments,
individual government officials and third-parties that could gain
authorized access e.g. to government-mandated "data retention"
infrastructures.

Greetings,
Norbert
____________________________________________________________
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