[governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities

[Jeremy Malcolm]

On 17/01/13 10:11, michael gurstein wrote:
> In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the
> Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology
> Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx
> I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as
> (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I
> believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... 

That part is all well and good, but the part that worries me (sorry if
you already heard from me about this on another list) is the treatment
of "The Multi-stakeholder Model" in the draft, in which it is correctly
stated that "A divergence in opinion is observed in the implementation
of the WSIS multistakeholder model in the current Internet governance
ecosystem", but that this is a divergence between only two views, one of
which is that "the current governance of the Internet is sufficiently
multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all
stakeholder groups" (attributed to Cisco, UK, USA and ISOC), and the
second (attributed to Saudi Arabia and Sudan and Algeria!) that "with
regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one
stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve according to
WSIS principles".

What about the third, missing view - that the current governance of the
Internet is NOT sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of
involvement of all stakeholder groups, but that rather than governments
being left out, it is civil society!  We can point to so many examples
of this, beginning at the ITU itself.

I think the report needs to be changed to correct this erroneous
characteristion of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. 
However the ITU is only receiving submissions from members (there is an
open platform for general comments, but they won't be received as direct
inputs to the SG's report).  We will therefore need to put in our
submission either through a friendly government (those who were members
of delegations at WCIT will already have these connections), or through
a sector member.  Consumers International has applied for sector
membership, but our application does not come up for consideration until
June.  We do have a CI member who is a sector member, but is there
anyone else on this list who also is (and who is less status-quoist than
ISOC)?  If not I will work with my member on some text.

-- 

*Dr Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Policy Officer
Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers*
Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599

*Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:*
http://consint.info/RightsMission

@Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org
<http://www.consumersinternational.org> |
www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
<http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130117/d7d00f8e/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