[governance] Re: Re [bestbits] [africs-ig] Civil Society speaker: IGF Opening ceremony - Nnenna

parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Tue Oct 22 00:24:12 EDT 2013 

As I sit in the 'role of govs' main session, I see no reason really why 
three people in 'positions' here - panel or as moderators - from civil 
society - one speaker and two moderators, should all be from developed 
countries....

I did put that question at the MAG open consultations in Paris earlier 
this year - about domination of speakers from developed countries, but 
nothing much seems to change...

In front of me on the panel, apart from the MAG Chair, three people from 
developed countries, one Indian who is AT & T employee, which I take to 
be his primary 'interest representation' , and just one person from 
developing countries, and two moderators from developed countries..

Figure, all people from developing countries has still to do a lot of 
capacity building... I understand a lot of 'IG' money is being poured by 
developed countries into developing countires, ans so thanks very much...

Maybe around 2050, we would have sufficient capacity (and dominant 
ideology) build up to be given some kind of consideration of equity in 
global spaces...

Meanwhile, to all UN baiters, this would never happen in a UN meeting...
/*
* //I will keep raising these question, which some take to be 
embarrassing, because I take it to be my political duty/ /to do so/... 
and so personal apologies to all involved.

parminder


On Tuesday 22 October 2013 08:58 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> I'm sure that everyone is heartened to hear this but dare I say that 
> your statement */"I made a conscious effort to stay off the focus 
> sessions this year and I believe other MAG CS people did too/*" is 
> precisely the problem.
>
> What sort of a governance/management process is operative in the 
> MAG/IGF where the already designated 5 or so members of the "MAG 
> crowd" have to "make a conscious decision" and show sufficienr 
> personal forebearance not to occupy all the places in public forums..
>
> Surely the issue is that there should be processes in place that 
> ensure that other voices are brought to the surface as a matter of 
> course and of effective procedural management., not of sufferance or 
> beneficence.
>
> M
>
> *From:*William Drake [mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 22, 2013 10:29 AM
> *To:* bestbits at lists.bestbits.net bestbits at lists.bestbits.net&gt
> *Cc:* michael gurstein
> *Subject:* Re [bestbits] [africs-ig] Civil Society speaker: IGF 
> Opening ceremony - Nnenna
>
> Let's try this again from a subscribed account….
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>>
>
> *Subject: Re: [bestbits] [africs-ig] Civil Society speaker: IGF 
> Opening ceremony - Nnenna*
>
> *Date: *October 22, 2013 9:29:28 AM GMT+08:00
>
> *To: *michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>
> *Cc: *"Esterhuysen, Anriette" <anriette at apc.org 
> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>>, bestbits at lists.bestbits.net 
> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>, Nnenna <nne75 at yahoo.com 
> <mailto:nne75 at yahoo.com>>
>
> Hi Mike
>
> I'm not subscribed to the two Africa-oriented lists you copied but 
> feel free to forward this if you like.
>
> On Oct 22, 2013, at 4:35 AM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com 
> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I must say that I disagree with a public endorsement of the IGF as 
> "THE" whatever… It may be "THE" something or other but only for lack 
> of a better alternative.
>
> Let's agree to disagree on this
>
> I can't do the reckoning for this IGF (the way the program is set up) 
> but by my count from the last IGF the (CS and to a slightly lesser 
> degree for the other stakeholders) presentations in the Workshops and 
> particularly plenaries consisted to an overwhelming and truly 
> astonishing degree of the same half dozen CS characters (lets call 
> them the MAG crowd) over and over again to the point of exhaustion, 
> likely of them but certainly of anyone wanting to hear any fresh 
> (and/or critical) perspectives. (Is it the case that a world with 
> roughly 2 billion Internet users can only turn up a half dozen people 
> to speak on its behalf at one yearly gabfest after another?)
>
> Criticizing this year's  program based on last year's doesn't seem 
> entirely fair.  I made a conscious effort to stay off the focus 
> sessions this year and I believe other MAG CS people did too.  In 
> consequence, the numbers don't seem to entirely match what you're saying.
>
> Opening Ceremonyno MAG CS
>
> Building Bridges FS: no MAG CS, except the remote moderator, not a 
> panelist
>
> IG Principles FSno MAG CS (I dropped out)
>
> Principles of Multistakeholder Cooperation FSNo MAG CS
>
> Legal and other Frameworks FSNo MAG CS
>
> Internet as an engine for growth FSNo MAG CS
>
>
> Human rights, freedom of expression FSNo MAG CS
>
> Taking Stock / Emerging Issues FSNo MAG CS
>
> Open Microphone Session 1two MAG, not CS though
>
> Closing Ceremonyno speakers listed but a CS rep TBD
>
> Workshops may be different, people on the MAG have as much right to 
> propose something as anyone else.  Nevertheless, I believe some of 
> these were turned down in the MAG review, and given the number of 
> events I don't think attendees are really left with no choice but to 
> hear the apparently old stale ideas of people who happen to be on the MAG.
>
> It would of course be good to have more workshops proposed by 
> non-usual suspects and I think there was a decent supply of these this 
> year.  But if you think more needs to be done, please get out there 
> and recruit newbies rather than criticizing previous attendees for 
> having the temerity to want to do something at the event.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
> There may be a "dialogue" going on, but if it is a dialogue it is one 
> that is stretching now over decades rather than (for example bridging 
> generations, or social or economic divides, or cultural backgrounds 
> and interests) and one of the reasons that the Brazil initiative is 
> required and is so challenging is that it (at least to this point) 
> isn't confined to the usual cast of (unrepresentative) characters.
>
> One fervently hopes that it will not be captured by the IGF and that 
> it does lead to a meaningful set of on-going processes that actually 
> address significant and critical issues rather than wraps them in 
> repetitiive (and dare I say deeply suspect) cotton batten and most 
> importantly looks towards democratic processes as the basis for in its 
> initiatives rather than "Multistakeholder" ones, upon which we are 
> still awaiting any useful definition or set of norms and procedures.
>
> Let this race go to the swiftest…
>
> M
>
> *From:*bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net 
> <mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net> 
> [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net 
> <mailto:request at lists.bestbits.net>]*On Behalf Of*Anriette Esterhuysen
> *Sent:*Tuesday, October 22, 2013 1:07 AM
> *To:*AfriCS-IG
> *Cc:*<bestbits at lists.bestbits.net 
> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>>; africann at afrinic.net 
> <mailto:africann at afrinic.net>; Nnenna Nwakanma
> *Subject:*[bestbits] Re: [africs-ig] Civil Society speaker: IGF 
> Opening ceremony - Nnenna
>
> Dear NN
>
> So happy you are doing this.
>
> Just a few suggestions below, if possible. Take or leave and good 
> luck. You will be fantastic!
>
> Anriette
>
>
> The centrality of human rights
>
>      1. Multistakeholder participation o
>      2. Ongoing work on enhanced cooperation
>
> Would be good to mention importance of civil society. Any approach to 
> EC that focuses oncooperation between governments at the expense of 
> cooperation among all stakeholders will not be sustainable.
>
>      1. Not losing the "development focus" of IG
>      2. The "not-ended" battle of Internet access and affordability
>      3. The urgent need to reinforce teh capacity and efficiency of MS
>         IG processes at national levels
>
> Would be good to mention the IGF. It has become THE most importance 
> milestone along the road to more transparent and consistent dialogue 
> among stakeholders. It is a bit like the tortoise and the hare story.. 
> perhaps ICANN/Brazil's initiative is working fast, and thinks it will 
> win the race.. but that is also what the hare thought. The IGF process 
> is like the tortoise.. yes, it is slow, but it is consistent, 
> reliable, not fully inclusive but more inclusive than most processes. 
> The hare should not underestimate it.
>
> BUT - IGF needs capacity - at leadership and secretariat level. It 
> would be very short sighted if resources are spent on new processes 
> that could be spent on the IGF's improvement,, continuity and 
> sustainability.
>
>      1. Brazil 2014?
>
>
> Sort of covered above.  But there are many points from other CS 
> discussions on this. I think we should say we look forward to it being 
> strategic rather than just opportunistic: 1) strategic in its agenda 
> setting and 2) in how it facilitates participation and 3) in how it 
> positions itself in relation to other processes like the IGF, and the 
> UN CSTD EC working group, and the WSIS +10 process. it would be a pity 
> the Brazil 2014 efforts did not achieve its potential because of 
> either lack of legitimacy, or not being focused enough in its agenda 
> setting.
>
>
>      1. Surveillance?
>
> From the APC 2013 IGF brief:
>
> Revelations about mass surveillance and data collection by the US 
> National Security
> Agency (NSA) has shaken the internet community and undermined the 
> legitimacy of
> actors from government and business who had positioned themselves as 
> leaders of the
> “internet freedom” movement.  [snip]
> The most positive – and challenging – outcomes of these disturbing 
> revelations can be
> built on by the IGF. Firstly, awareness of how internet policy and 
> regulation affects all
> users is now much more widespread and talked about in global media. 
> Secondly, it cannot
> be ignored that while public debate is flourishing at the IGF and 
> internet freedom events
> around the world, there is, in the shadows, another internet 
> governance universe: one that
> is secret, that follows the rule of law very selectively, or not at 
> all. A universe in which
> powerful governments can ask powerful internet companies to comply 
> with rules that are
> not public, not known, not even to the elected representatives of 
> those governments, not
> to mention the shareholders of those companies, or the staff members 
> of those
> administrations working hard to promote human rights on the internet, 
> transparency and
> multi-stakeholder participation in global internet governance.
> The IGF is a space where the internet community can let off steam, 
> confront one another
> (surely that is why we come together in multi-stakeholder spaces?), 
> and identify how to
> move forward to restore trust in internet governance as a process, and 
> an ecosystem
> made up of institutions, actors, analysts and activists. Complacency 
> is not an option."
>
>
>      1. Best Bits?
>
>         All for now
>
>         Nnenna
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         AfriCS-IG mailing list
>         Info and options:http://lists.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/africs-ig
>         To unsubscribe, emailafrics-ig-unsubscribe at lists.apc.org
>         <mailto:africs-ig-unsubscribe at lists.apc.org>
>
>
>
>
>     --
>     Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
>     Coordinator
>     The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
>     MDI Road Kanifing South
>     P. O. Box 421 Banjul
>     The Gambia, West Africa
>     Tel: (220) 4370240
>     Fax:(220) 4390793
>     Cell:(220) 9912508
>     Skype: pons_utd
>     /www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm/>
>     www.waigf.org <http://www.waigf.org/>
>     www.aficta.org <http://www.aficta.org/>
>     www.itag.gm <http://www.itag.gm/>
>     www.npoc.org <http://www.npoc.org/>
>     http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753
>     www.diplointernetgovernance.org
>     <http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/>
>
>     *
>
>     */
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     AfriCS-IG mailing list
>
>     Info and options:http://lists.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/africs-ig
>
>     To unsubscribe, emailafrics-ig-unsubscribe at lists.apc.org  <mailto:africs-ig-unsubscribe at lists.apc.org>
>
>
>
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysenanriette at apc.org  <mailto:anriette at apc.org>
> executive director, association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org  <http://www.apc.org/>
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20131022/ce922d8a/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

More information about the Governance mailing list