[governance] WTPF May 2013
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Sun Jul 8 09:11:13 EDT 2012
Dear Sergio,
Thanks for sharing these documents, and for your overall efforts to open
ITU documents to the general public.
I read Brazil's inputs to the ITU SG's report with great interest. I
have a specific question regarding it. In recommending to the ITU that
it develops its own principles for Internet governance, and referring to
the Brazilian principles in this regard, does Brazil not look at the ITU
as the place to discuss and decide on global Internet related public
policies, which is the definitional mandate given by Tunis agenda to the
process of 'enhanced cooperation'? (Such is the work done by OECD's
CCICP, e.g. developing as it did recently Principles for Internet Policy
Making)
If indeed Brazil (and the same question applies to other actors) is
now so intent to let ITU's CWG-Internet be that space of 'enhanced
cooperation', any discussion on whether a UN CIRP (minus any oversight
role) for fulfilling the non CIR side of enhanced cooperation mandate
becomes, to that extent, redundant. As I read WTFP documents, and I
recommend others interested in the enhanced cooperation also to read
them, it is apparent that the ITU's Council Working Group on
International Internet Related Public Policy Issues (CWG-Internet) seems
poised to take up the role that some envisaged for a UN CIRP like body
(minus CIR oversight role).
I know that CWG-Internet does not take binding decisions but has only
recommendatory role to the ITU Council. However CIRP was supposed to
have exactly an identical role vis a vis the UN GA, which would have to
follow up to make actual implementable decisions etc. I see both ITU's
CWG-Internet and UN CIRP having more or less identical advisory and
facilitative roles to respective intergov decision making bodies. As
one reads WTFP documents, one sees that the envisaged subject areas for
the two entities (one existing and other proposed) is becoming
increasingly similar.
I pose this question especially because Brazil has reserved its
judgement whether to support a UN CIRP like structure or not, and I am
trying to explore the implications of this position. If in not
supporting a CIRP like body one means just to let ITU's CWG-Internet
take up more or less exactly that work, it raises some basic questions
on the nature of reservations that Brazil, and others in civil society
(including from Brazil), had or have vis a vis the CIRP proposal. Are
the reservations really vis a vis multistakeholderism,
participative-ness and transparency as has apparently looked to be the
case? But how do these reservation hold in encouraging, or even
allowing, ITU's CWG-Internet to take up more or less exactly the same role?
The proposed design of UN CIRP is by far better on all these three
counts (multistakeholderism, participative-ness and transparency) than
ITU's CWG-Internet. Secondly, ITU is basically a body with a technical
mandate, and corresponding mindset, which is evident in its processes
and perspectives. It has no real background and expertise in social,
cultural, economic and political issues. Internet, especially from civil
society's point of view, should first be seen from social etc angles,
and ITU, in my view, is not the best place to do so. Actors and
institutions with generic social, cultural, economic and political
backgrounds are better placed to deal with global IG and its wider
public policy questions. These two sets of reasons is why I prefer a UN
CIRP like body to ITU's CWG-Internet, and I am open to a discussion
about the relative merits of the two.
However, I can see now that the chances are that ITU's CWG-Internet
would take over the proposed role of CIRP in the area of 'enhanced
cooperation' as defined in the Tunis agenda. It may be a creeping
acquisition but it is well planned and resourced. (Without going into
the merits of it, Toure's team deserves appreciation for such a good
plan and its impeccable execution.) ITU may even be able to bring more
institutional resources and certainly greater institutional focus to the
'enhanced cooperation' function. Solid institutionalisation around this
function is clearly well on its way. (With WSIS forum and all, also
providing the otherwise missing social, economic, cultural political basis.)
I bring up this point because I believe that in politics acts of
omission are often as important as those of commission. Civil society
may need to make a practical choice; Is ITU's CWG-Internet the right
place for (non CIR oversight) 'enhanced cooperation' function or is a
new more open and participative body with an initial
socio-economic-cultural focus (like UN CIRP) a more appropriate body. In
default of such a resolution, we may simply be agreeing to ITU
CWG-Internet takinge up this role, which it clearly is taking up.
Although, whether because it is being careful, at least in the
beginning, or becuase ITU by its nature focuses more on technical
issues, the list of issues proposed to be covered still are *relatively*
technical even when the express intent is to jump headlong into the
broad area of International Internet related public policies. Now, if
CWG-Internet is indeed going to be the 'enhanced cooperation' space,
which to me looks increasingly likely, I consider this narrow
close-to-technical focus unfortunate. To illustrate what I mean, OECD's
Committee on ICCP is right now discussing 'economics of personal data on
the Internet', which is one of the most key and formative factors and
features of what the Internet is and would be. I would like a globally
democratic space to discuss this all important global public policy
issue, but dont see a place to do so. Should this issue finally somehow
fit CWG-Internet's agenda? While its mandate seems broad to include all
global Internet public policy issues, I do not see ITU's CWG-Internet as
the best place for this discussion. But if not here, then where? It is
too important an issue not be addressed globally.
I also find it unfortunate that there is not much will on this civil
society like, I mean the IGC, to discuss enhanced cooperation issue
beyond the CIR oversight issue (on which we had a very good discussion).
As I have said, I find these larger global Internet related public
policy issues as of rather greater significance that CIR oversight.
However, there seems not much interest here to discuss this more
important part of enhanced cooperation and its institutional gaps and
requirements. We seem to be too CIRs fixated.
parminder
On Thursday 28 June 2012 10:36 PM, Sérgio Alves Jr. wrote:
> http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx
>
> For the time being, most WTPF-13 docs are open.
>
>
> Abraços,
> Sérgio
>
>
> Informal Experts Group
>
> In accordance with the Council Decision 562
> <http://www.itu.int/md/S11-CL-C-0102/en>, the Secretary-General will
> convene a balanced,* informal group of experts(IEG)* - who are active
> in preparing for the Forum in their own country - to assist in the
> successive stages of the preparatory process. The proposed deadline
> for nominations for this group of experts is 15 May 2012.
> The* schedule *for publishing the Secretary-General’s report to
> WTPF-13 is included in Circular letter DM 12/1003.
> <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-DM-CIR-01003/en>
>
> A *progress report *on the fifth World Telecommunication/Information
> and Communication Technology Policy Forum on Internet-related public
> policy issues is included in Circular letter DM 12/1016
> <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-DM-CIR-01016/en>.
>
> FIRST MEETING
> *5 June 2012, ITU Headquarters, Geneva*
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/1 <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13IEG1-C-0001/en>:
> Draft Agenda
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/2 <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13PREP-R-0001/en>:
> First draft of Secretary-General's report
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/3 <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13PREP-C-0010/en>:
> Comments from the Russian federation on the First draft of
> Secretary-General's report.
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/4
> <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13PREP-C-0009/en>:Comments from
> Brazil on the First draft of Secretary-General's report
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/5
> <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13PREP-C-0008/en>:Comments from
> ARIN on the First draft of Secretary-General's report
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/6 <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13PREP-C-0007/en>:
> Comments from the United States on the First draft of
> Secretary-General's report
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/7 <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13PREP-C-0011/en>:
> Comments from Internet Society (ISOC)
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/8 <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13IEG1-C-0002/en>:
> Invitation letter
>
> * *WTPF-IEG/1/9* <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13PREP-R-0002/en>*:
> **Preliminary Second Draft of the Secretary-General’s Report
>
> *
> * WTPF-IEG/1/10
> <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13IEG1-C-0003/en>:**List of
> announced experts
>
> * WTPF-IEG/1/11
> <http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13IEG1-C-0004/en>:**Report of the
> Chairman on the first meeting of the informal expert group (IEG)
>
> * WTPF-09/2 <http://www.itu.int/md/S09-WTPF-C-0002/en>: Rules of
> procedure of the fourth World Telecommunication Policy Forum (WTPF-09)
>
>
>
> 2012/6/27 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
> <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>>
>
>
> FYI
>
> wolfgang
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto: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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120708/c7d7f71a/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list