[governance] DMP} Statement on Process and Objectives for the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

I doubt it. Following existing processes from inside is going to work far better for you 

--srs (htc one x)

----- Reply message -----
From: "Norbert Bollow" <nb at bollow.ch>
To: <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
Subject: [governance] DMP} Statement on Process and Objectives for the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance
Date: Sun, Dec 1, 2013 5:12 PM

The approach proposed by Parminder below is reasonable IMO. I
particularly like the idea of creating a trustworthy international
jurisdiction. In today's highly globalized world, that could turn out to
be very valuable also for purposes quite different from Internet
governance.

Greetings,
Norbert 


Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> 
> On Saturday 30 November 2013 06:58 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote:
> > Some concepts are too complex to force them into a single word.
> > Deirdre
> 
> Deirdre/ All
> 
> Most things in social and political discourse are complex. However, 
> there is always a way to build categories, split issues, and progress
> in steps , whereby we can certainly talk meaningfully about them and
> make social and political progress... Such a shared intention is
> key...
> 
> I think there are two clear issues about 'internationalisation of
> ICANN'
> 
> 1. Its legal status, and the jurisdiction to which it is subject.
> 
> 2. The actual role of US-NTIA in authorising every change in the root
> file.
> 
> It seems that other than the US gov itself, everyone agrees that
> US-NTIA should be divested of that 'root change authorising'
> role..... Then the question comes; (a) should the role then be
> exercised directly and finally by ICANN itself, or (b) another body
> to undertake this role (and just this role and nothing else) is
> needed.
> 
> A lot of people - including i* group - are of the opinion that (a)
> above is the best option. Some others think that every significant
> decision pertaining to a crucial global infrastructure should be
> subject to a second opinion or confirmation, as a normal prudence, by
> a body different from the executive authority (ICANN Board). One way
> would be to have some kind of international oversight board (not
> necessarily inter-gov) undertaking the same role as undertaken by
> US-NTIA today. Another way is to allow ICANN to make root changes but
> all such decisions are post facto reviewed and confirmed by such an
> international oversight board. ( Whether with a pre facto or post
> facto role, such an oversight board will exercise its role within
> clearly set our parameters and rules.) A third way is to only have an
> appellate board which reviews root change decisions only if an appeal
> is made to it through a due process.
> 
> Therefore, on point 2 above, we can easily agree to ask US-NTIA to
> shed its oversight role. What should further be done can be discussed
> along the above three lines (others may add more options if any)
> 
> Point 1 above is more contentious. Although, in principles, it is
> easy to assert that a global resource cannot be subject to the
> jurisdiction of one country and that it should be subject to
> international jurisdiction. The issue then is; how to form such an
> international jurisdiction.
> 
> Here too, it is easy for us as a civil society group to assert the 
> principle - yes, it is untenable that ICANN continues to be subject
> to US law and jurisdiction. ICANN needs to be made subject to
> international law and jurisdiction. Lets do first agree on this
> principle. If we do, we can then take up the subsequent discussion of
> how to establish an appropriate jurisdiction and legal framework for
> ICANN. I am sure we can close onto a few clear options, if not agree
> on one.
> 
> A structured discussion on the above lines will help identify areas
> we all agree on, explore the possibility of convergences on those we
> do not, and in the latter case, at least come out with a clear set of 
> alternatives.
> 
> parminder
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20131201/d8fdca26/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