[governance] CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation

[parminder]

Dear Constance,

Thank you for your response. There a few other points i'd like to raise 
but for the present, quickly, just the following two.

Good that you clearly state the criteria you used to identify who would 
be considered as members of the 'technical and academic community' for 
the purpose of selection to the WG on Enhanced Cooperation in the following:

"......community of organizations and individuals who are involved in 
the day-to-day operational management of the Internet and who work 
within this community." (Constance)

One of the main purposes of our proposed letter to you/ISOC was to 
obtain this definition used by you. So thanks again. BTW, this 
definition seem not to match the understanding of most people  in our 
current discussion on the IGC, but on that later.

Secondly, since you say; "...it is unclear how attacks between different 
stakeholder groups can support multistakeholderism." (Constance)

Would you help us to identify what in the proposed draft of the letter, 
or even in the recent discussion on the list, do you consider as 'attack 
on a stakeholder group'.

Would you, for instance, consider a letter seeking clarity from a UN 
body on some process issues, or even raising concerns about some process 
issues, as an attack on that UN body, or on governments generally? IGC 
has often done such things.

Best regards, parminder



On Sunday 17 March 2013 02:48 PM, Constance Bommelaer wrote:
> Dear Anriette,
>
> I am writing to you in your capacity of focal point for the Civil 
> Society for the nomination process of the CSTD working group on 
> Enhanced Cooperation. At the outset, I would like to reaffirm the 
> importance we attach to the relationships we have been able to build 
> across various stakeholders groups throughout the years. For this 
> reason I am also sending a copy to Ayesha and to the Civil Society group.
>
> The process of setting up the CSTD working Group on Enhanced 
> Cooperation has taken an unfortunate twist. We noticed that there is a 
> move underway to question the representation of the technical and 
> academic community in the Working Group and we presume that this was 
> triggered by the discussions surrounding the non-selection of Michael 
> Gurstein.
>
> I was asked to coordinate the selection of the representatives of our 
> stakeholder group and I did so in a thorough process within our 
> community. The names put forward were subject to considerable 
> discussion as well as oral dialogue with many individuals from Civil 
> Society and the Business community (including their focal points). The 
> criteria used were shared with all interested individuals as well as 
> with the UN.
>
> Mr Gurstein’s application was assessed in light of the same criteria 
> and his name was not retained. We fail to understand why he appeals to 
> the Chairman of the CSTD and tries to question our procedures. Up 
> until February 2013, he considered himself being part of Civil Society 
> and spoke as one of its leaders and representatives at the recent 
> WSIS+10 meeting. I also understand that he initially expressed an 
> interest to be endorsed by the Civil Society to participate to the 
> CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation, which also leads to 
> confusion. For purpose of transparency, I mentioned his interest to 
> the Chair of the CSTD who nominates the representatives of the various 
> stakeholder groups. I do believe, however, that unsuccessful 
> applicants in one process should not engage in “constituency shopping” 
> and question the entire process.
>
> The Tunis Agenda identified the technical and academic community as a 
> separate sub-group. De UN de facto recognized it as a separate group 
> and always asked ISOC to coordinate the selection process. It is 
> understood that the definition contained in the Tunis Agenda can be 
> discussed; new groups could even appear tomorrow. However, the context 
> was clear and it referred to the community of organizations and 
> individuals who are involved in the day-to-day operational management 
> of the Internet and who work within this community.  This category 
> manifested itself in the WGIG process. Other academics had been 
> involved in WSIS right from the start but identified themselves with 
> Civil Society. This distinction has been used by the UN since 2005.
>
> Meanwhile, it is unclear how attacks between different stakeholder 
> groups can support multistakeholderism. In my view, advocating for the 
> technical and academic community to be merged with Civil Society or 
> even for its representatives to be appointed by governments 
> contradicts the multistakeholder principle that we are all attached 
> to. Furthermore, I believe no group should attempt to impose control 
> upon another, nor should any group be beholden to another.  This would 
> be the end of multistakeholderism.
>
> Multistakeholder cooperation is still in its beginning. It is a 
> delicate plant but each stakeholder group can contribute to nurturing 
> it with its own culture, and processes. The technical community’s work 
> is based on open and inclusive development processes. In this spirit, 
> the Internet Society has always demonstrated its commitment to open 
> and inclusive policy dialogues. We systematically advocate for the 
> inclusion of Civil Society in arenas where critical discussions are 
> being held (e.g. ITU, OECD, etc). We also support the participation of 
> individuals from all stakeholder groups in Internet governance 
> discussions (IGF, IETF, etc.).
>
> Cooperation and reciprocal encouragements among all stakeholder groups 
> are key to advance the cause of multistakeholderism. I look forward to 
> working with all of you in this spirit.
>
> Thank you and best regards,
>
>


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