[governance] Stakeholder Participation in the Enhanced Cooperation Meeting in Geneva
Anriette Esterhuysen
anriette at apc.org
Fri May 11 11:10:15 EDT 2012
dear michael
i am too busy to respond in full.... but i like the idea of looking at
the OGP process a lot!
i had a good look at the declaration, and the section on 'measures'
the idea this gave me is that is needed is a process that will build
such a declaration on EC - process which is inclusive of a wide range of
instutitions, constituencies etc.
so.. like the WGIG process.. but with its specific goal being agreement
on a 'Declaration on inclusive, multi-stakeholder international internet
governance'
anriette
On 09/05/12 16:46, michael gurstein wrote:
> In this context, I think that the IGC should be paying extremely
> close attention to the Open Government Partnership
> <http://www.opengovpartnership.org/> which I pointed to earlier.
>
> The OGP has a formal "Declaration
> <http://http://www.opengovpartnership.org/open-government-declaration>"
> (i.e. normative statement--"convention" if you will) to which
> Members need to formally commit themeselves. The Partner
> country's membership in the Partnership is initially accepted
> based on their adherence to the Charter and whose on-going
> performance is equally assessed (includng by CS) against their
> stated plan/committment concerning the implementation of the forward
> looking provisions of the Charter.
>
> Secondly, CS has a formally defined role as a full-fledged "partner"
> in the Partnership with certain designated rights and
> responsibilities including a co-Chairmanship of the overall
> Partnership.
>
> Although there are a number of elements still in the process of
> being worked out (not the least of which is the structuring of CS in
> the context of the OGP) to my mind this is a direction towards which
> EC/IG should be moving, towards which CS should be pushing IG, and
> which overall represents a potentially very positive post Atlantic
> Charter direction for the overall evolution of CS and Global
> Governance in the Age of the Internet.
>
> Best,
>
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *parminder
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 09, 2012 6:41 AM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Stakeholder Participation in the
> Enhanced Cooperation Meeting in Geneva
>
> On Tuesday 08 May 2012 08:40 PM, michael gurstein wrote:
>> It seems to me that the basic issues of Enhanced Cooperation from a CS perspective are twofold:
>>
> We, as a set of civil society players, have tried to present
> concrete possibilities for both, but with no engagement from the
> larger CS involved with IG.
>
>> 1. what is the normative framework within which EC should take place--my strong suggestion would be that it is that of transparency, accountability, democracy and inclusiveness (and of course there is the WSIS declaration etc. to support this). And that this should be presented as a declaration and within a framing document.
>>
>
> A framework convention on the Internet was proposed, but found no
> traction among the CS actors in IG. Yes, it needs to be informed by
> the values that you mention.
>
>> 2. that having agreed on such a normative framework the question is what is the most appropriate institutional arrangement for achieving these within the context of Internet governance.
>>
>
> UN CIRP proposal has as multistakeholder a structure as OECD's
> Internet policy making mechanism (which is the default global
> Internet policy making system at present), plus seeking strong
> linkages with a rather empowered multistakeholder IGF (India IGF
> proposal). If something else/more is needed and possible that it
> must be spelt out.
>
> Still, we believe that even a CIRP kind of body should be an interim
> arrangement, doing stop-gap work, but focussing on the activity of
> being the nodal point for developing a suitable framework convention
> on the Internet, which 'framework convention' then proposes the
> right body for global governance of the global internet, which is
> fully adequate and appropriate to the phenomenon, context etc.
>
> If someone has a different/ better roadmap, lets discuss it.
>
> Non engagement with and non-proposal of clear concrete road-maps is
> simply an acceptance of the status quo in global Internet
> governance, and we think that the staus quo is hugely problematic,
> involves ever greater concentration of power, and is thus not
> acceptable.
>
> parminder
>
>> Mike
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Anriette Esterhuysen
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 1:08 AM
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Stakeholder Participation in the Enhanced Cooperation Meeting in Geneva
>>
>>
>> Dear Bill, Adam and all
>>
>> The agenda is very basic. I will post it below. Parminder and I have both been asked to speak. APC will post our basic input here as soon as we have had a chance to present it to members first.
>>
>> Basically my idea is to shift the discussion towards the involvement of civil society in EC and rather than just the usual involvement of governments. My gut reaction to EC is that there is all this dispute about the involvements from States and while this is kind of going nowhere, there appears to be less cooperation and more concentration of power among large companies, rich country governments, and established IG 'institutions'.
>>
>> I hope this will complement Parminder's input which I hope will focus on the imbalances in governmental involvement from governments in the north (who tend to say they don't want control, but they already have it) and governments in the south (who say they want more control and who don't have much at global level, and who are not demonstrating, consistently, good use of the control they do have at national level - in my view).
>>
>> A serious discussion on what governments responsibilities are and of WHAT they need to be involved in would be useful in my view.
>>
>> And then finally, and I would appreciate IGC input on this.. among APC staff we have had a discussion of the parameters of EC. Is EC just something we should be talking about at global level, or also at national level.
>>
>> I feel stongly that we need to take the discussion to EC in IG at national level. And this should touch on global IG issues (how countries engage, whether there is capacity building, consultation, etc. around involvement in global issues/process) as well as on national IG issues.
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>> 11:00-
>> 13:00
>> Welcoming remarks by the Chair of the CSTD, Mr. Fortunato de la Peña ■ Address by: Dr. Hamadoun Touré, Secretary-General of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) ■ Address by: Mr. Nigel Hickson, Vice President for Europe, ICANN ■ Address by: Mr. Markus Kummer, Vice President Public Policy, Internet Society ■ Address by: Mr. Jimson Olufuye, Vice-Chairman, Africa Region, World Information Technology and Services Alliance ■ Address by: Mr. Parminder Singh, Executive Director, IT for Change ■ Address by: Ms. Marilyn Cade, CEO, mCADE LLC ■ Address by: Ms. Anriette Esterhuysen, Executive Director, Association for Progressive Communications
>> 15:00-
>> 18:00
>> General discussion
>>
>> On 08/05/12 09:06, Adam Peake wrote:
>>
>>> Could you give a pointer to the agenda.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:55 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>
>>> <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Just wondering if we want to do anything about this? The draft
>>> program has a couple of IGCers as speakers but no clarity on rules
>>> of engagement for other attendees…?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 18, 2012, at 11:05 AM, William Drake wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> As you know, there will be an enhanced cooperation consultation on
>>>> 18 May in Geneva, following the IGF consultations and MAG
>>>> meeting. http://archive.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=6227&lang=1 <http://archive.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=6227&lang=1>
>>>>
>>>> <http://archive.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=6227&lang=1> <http://archive.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=6227&lang=1>
>>>>
>>>> It would be very important that all stakeholders are able to
>>>> intervene and contribute freely (but strategically) during this
>>>> consultation, rather than have to sit silently on the sidelines or
>>>> be relegated to collective brief interventions at the end of each
>>>> session. I imagine that ICC (business) and ISOC (TC) will be
>>>> contacting the CSTD secretariat to make such a request. On behalf
>>>> of civil society, the IGC should do the same.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming people agree with the proposition, may I suggest that the
>>>> co-coordinators take a crack at drafting a one or two paragraph
>>>> letter to Mongi to this effect? Probably it would be better to do
>>>> it sooner than later, as the secretariat would then need to pass
>>>> the request along to governments etc…
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>> ***************************************************
>>>> William J. Drake
>>>> International Fellow & Lecturer
>>>> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>>>> University of Zurich, Switzerland
>>>> william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch> <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>
>>>> www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake <http://www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake>
>>>> <http://www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake>
>>>> www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org> <http://www.williamdrake.org>
>>>> ****************************************************
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto: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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
--
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
executive director, association for progressive communications
www.apc.org
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
____________________________________________________________
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
More information about the Governance
mailing list