[governance] Stakeholder Participation in the Enhanced Cooperation Meeting in Geneva
Marilia Maciel
mariliamaciel at gmail.com
Tue May 15 09:12:16 EDT 2012
I have been invited to replace some speaker on the EC meeting that could
not make it.
Kind of last minute, but I am reading the thread and keeping track of
discussions.
Marília
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 7:25 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> Yes, I think that would be the effective approach here...
>
> Again, what the OGP process has done is to create a consensus based
> normative declaration among a community of the willing and are building an
> institutional framework to support the on-going, broad based, and
> collabortive implementations towards the realization of these norms.
>
> It seems to me that CS should be striving in this direction in the IG area
> given that it's own involvement in IG is (or at least should be) based on
> consensus based operational Internet norms (transparency, net neutrality,
> inclusivity and so on).
>
> I don't expect to be in Baku so I'm hoping that should such a process be
> initiated at the upcoming IGF that it be one inclusive of remote
> participation.
>
> M
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:
> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Anriette Esterhuysen
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 8:24 AM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Stakeholder Participation in the Enhanced
> Cooperation Meeting in Geneva
>
>
> 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 what would be very useful for IG is a
> consultative process that will build such a declaration on EC - a process
> which is inclusive of a wide range of instutitions, constituencies, sectors
> 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.orgpo 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.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
>
>
--
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio
Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120515/90303505/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