[governance] IGF and Enhanced Cooperation

Avri Doria avri at ella.com
Mon May 28 10:37:59 EDT 2012 

Hi,

Personally I think we need to keep pushing for something during IGF2012.  

Let's go into WCIT with the IGF having made room for the problem and having started the process.  We have 5 months yet before the meeting, things can't possibly be set in stone at this point.  We have a new MAG that was forced to accept a program they were not completely comfortable with, they are entitled to still be thinking about how to make IGF12 as valuable as they possibly can.  (Not that I have the faintest idea of whether they would be interested in taking such action)

And whether we can get it into the IGF12 agenda, which I think its the optimal solution, or not, I think the idea that Anriette mentioned on the list earlier:


On 27 May 2012, at 11:22, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:

> Dear Avri
> 
> We definitely must use the IGF and APC is already thinking of planning a
> pre-event on this. Not finalised.. and we are talking to various
> partners.. but I feel strongly we must facilitate substantive dialogue.
> 
> The IGF was set up to facilitate such discussions. Some people tried to
> prevent this from happening. I think they now realise that a) they might
> have been wrong and/or b) further avoidance is not in the interest of
> the IGF or of multi-stakeholder participation in IG.
> 
> Anriette

Perhaps since 71 puts the responsibility on the relevant organizations (which I take to mean the mangers of critical Internet resources) to get this underway: "Relevant organizations should commence a process towards enhanced cooperation involving all stakeholders", it won't be to hard to find a set of good sponsors for such an event.

But to be clear. I would like to see both a full day pre-event discussion, and for that event to bring a report (dare i say recommendations?) to the IGF in a workshop arranged for discussion of EC and the IGF.

avri



On 28 May 2012, at 10:18, Adam Peake wrote:

> Anriette, thanks.
> 
> Doesn't make sense to me, but nevermind :-)
> 
> So what next?  Enhanced cooperation on the agenda of IGF 2013?  I'd 
> support that.
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
>> Hi Adam
>> 
>> We actually checked with one of the authors recently... and she said
>> that was exactly what she remembers intending the text to say (Avri's
>> interpretation).
>> 
>> Anriette
>> 
>> 
>> On 28/05/2012 15:35, Adam Peake wrote:
>>>> Agree completely with this logical sequential interpretation by Avri.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I agree with the logic, but as mentioned, don't think the document was
>>> drafted with that in mind, those last hours were a mess and this was the
>>> text that was being worked on.  But I wasn't the only one on the room
>>> and my memory is terrible!
>>> 
>>> I read 71 and 72 as separate.  If they'd intended to be linked there
>>> would be text saying so, there would be some connecting language
>>> (furthermore...), and the mandate of the IGF would include a reference
>>> to enhanced cooperation.  The mandate's very clear, a to l. Wish I could
>>> remember if this was discussed in Tunis.
>>> 
>>> And also Nitin decided it for us.  Both paragraphs ask the secretary
>>> general to do something, Nitin as the special advisor for Internet
>>> governance said separate and I guess that's him speaking for the SG.  So
>>> if they are to be linked now it would be the SG or his proxy that does it.
>>> 
>>> Adam
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Anriette
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 28/05/2012 15:10, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>  On 28 May 2012, at 02:23, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>  Leaving aside for a moment the subsequent UNGA resolution on the
>>>>>> matter (but noting that even though, strictly speaking, we are not
>>>>>> talking about binding international law, the principle of "lex
>>>>>> posterior" could apply) I would be curious to know your views on
>>>>>> which passages of the WSIS texts could lead to such conclusion.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  I think I may have already sent this to this list at some point, but
>>>>> it bears repeating often.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  In terms of my personal opinion, I think the Tunis Agenda actually
>>>>> places responsiblity for the Enhanced Cooperation with the Forum.
>>>>>  As I read the Tunis Agenda text,
>>>>> 
>>>>>  - 67 calls for a forum in a general sense,
>>>>>  - 68 calls for the equal participation of governments,
>>>>>  - 69 call for enhanced cooperation
>>>>>  - 70 calls for the participation of existing IG organizations and
>>>>> creation of principles,
>>>>>  - 71 calls for UNSG initiation of a multistakeholder process on
>>>>> enhanced cooperation with yearly status reports and
>>>>>  - 72 defines the forum called for in 67.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  In other words the entire discussion is bracketed by the notion of a
>>>>> forum.  It is called for, it is described, one task is brought out
>>>>> more than any other, and then they get into the nitty gritty of the
>>>>> forum called for in 67.  In any case it is certain that the TA called
>>>>> for the process of EC, whether we argue it is in or out of the
>>>>> context of the IGF, that it must also be a multistakeholder process:
>>>>> from 71: "... should commence a process towards enhanced cooperation
>>>>> involving all stakeholders,"
>>>>> 
>>>>>  avri
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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.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.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
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


-------------- 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