[governance] CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation

Sun Mar 17 07:43:54 EDT 2013

On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
>
>> Parminder, your response to Constance was not written as one of an
>> individual.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> [ST>]  It is understood that when subscribers communicate and send posts
> or emails, they do so in their own capacity unless they otherwise mention
> as Constance did in her email to Anriette which was copied to the
> governance.
>
> [ST>] Meant to say "copied to the IGC list"

>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 8:23 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sunday 17 March 2013 04:31 PM, Adam Peake wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Parminder, please don't speak for civil society or for members of the
>> >> caucus.
>> >>
>> >> Adam
>> >
>> >
>> > Adam, please dont jump to your conclusions, I have no authority to
>> speak for
>> > IGC, or civil society, and I know it very well. I have enough
>> experience in
>> > this area to know this, and conduct myself properly. What makes you
>> think i
>> > am trying to do what you are alleging I am. It is great that a civil
>> society
>> > member cannot conduct a simple dialogue with a representative of ISOC
>> > withour your kind of over zealous protectiveness interfering, and
>> helping
>> > make a spectacle of all of us. I know that from what will follow this
>> > particular exchange you may have effectively killed the dialogue I was
>> > trying to make. Congrats.... parminder
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 7:19 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> 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,
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ____________________________________________________________
>> >>> 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
>> >
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> P.O. Box 17862
> Suva
> Fiji
>
> Twitter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Tel: +679 3544828
> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
> Blog: salanieta.blogspot.com
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
P.O. Box 17862
Suva
Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Tel: +679 3544828
Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
Blog: salanieta.blogspot.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130317/e2507cbd/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