[governance] Ad hoc Best Bits strategy meeting tomorrow lunchtime

[McTim]

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:31 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 06 November 2013 06:32 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>
> India hasn't explicitly repudiated that proposal.
>
>
> Which more or less goes against what you said in your earlier email.
>
> The following is a proposal that India distributed to the WGEC today, and I
> quote the relevant part
>
> "Thus there is a clear mandate for defining a mechanism for effective global
> Internet governance. The UN General Assembly could embark on creation of a
> multilateral body for formulation of international internet-related public
> policies. The proposed body should include all stakeholders and relevant
> inter-governmental and international organisations in advisory capacity
> within their respective roles as identified in Tunis agenda and WGIG report.
> Such body should also develop globally applicable principles on public
> policy issues associated with the coordination and management of critical
> Internet resources".
>
> Does it sound like CIRP?


yes, it's multilateral!


>
> And I can assure that this is a well considered official position of
> government of India, with agreement of all the concerned ministries,  and
> 'not the product of overzealousness of one bureaucrat or the other'.
>
> Here it is  not the question of whether I agree with the above position or
> not, but to clear falsehoods being spread systematically about India's
> position. BTW, this is not very different from the position articulated by
> Brazilian President in here recent UN speech, and I quote...
>
> "The United Nations must play a leading role in the effort to regulate the
> conduct of States with regard to these technologies.

Which States are willing to give up sovereignty in order to be
regulated by the UN in this regard?

 For this reason, Brazil
> will present proposals for the establishment of a civilian multilateral
> framework for the governance and use of the Internet and to ensure the
> effective protection of data that travels through the web. We need to create
> multilateral mechanisms for the worldwide network that are capable of
> ensuring principles such as:........"
>
>
> Public policy development spaces are urgently needed at the global level, We
> need to ensure these are as open and participative as possible, and that
> civil society has a strong role in these spaces, and these are connected
> appropriately to the IGF, without making the manifestly anti-democratic
> demand that corporations, self selected civil society persons and such
> actually have an equal role as governments in decision making processes in
> terms of Internet related pubic policy making. Such a demand is no less
> unacceptable than a demand that pharma companies should have a veto over
> health policies at the global and national levels.

So what you are saying is that the RIR processes are unacceptable to
you? After all they "make" public policy regarding Internet number
resources and have a greater role than governments in making these
policies (largely because most governments do not participate in these
processes).  People involved in these processes are mainly staff of
corporations (even though they largely represent themselves), plus CS
and others of course.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

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