[governance] Re: [bestbits] Three NETmundial submissions launched for endorsement at bestbits.net
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Thu Mar 6 00:30:06 EST 2014
On Thursday 06 March 2014 03:24 AM, Nigel Hickson wrote:
> Parminder
>
> Good evening; when you say the "global community" in the UN; are you
> thinking beyond governments; it is just I recall that when in the UNGA
> I only recalled governments.....
Good evening, Nigel.
With global community, I mean the people of the world... (similar to the
evocation also made in most of our national constitutions and also in
the UN Charter <https://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/preamble.shtml>
- 'We, the people..' kind of stuff'.
Which of course immediately brings us to the issue of practicality of
processes to develop public policies, since no room can accommodate 8
billion people neither have any means been perfected to have 8 billion
people communicate at the same time and be able to reach a mutual
determination of public interest..
So, in fact we are dealing with the issue of the /next best option/,
which the democratic thought took to be some kind of representation, so
that a given practical number of people can do this work on behalf of
the 8 billion.. while keeping some kind of close touch with the 8
billion and ensuring that it is them that they represent at all times,
and so on...
Whereby, the question is, what is the best way to have representativity,
and what is the best way to keep a continuous touch or contact that I
speak of above..
It was thought that democratic elections are best to develop
representativity, but it was also thought that further democratic
process outside and between elections remain necessary - to keep in
touch, which generally go in the name of participatory democracy...
Now, no election is fully ok - the Chinese is much less ok that US and
Indian, and so on... And that is the struggle for democracy. Even in
India or the US, many think that although there are largely free and
fair elections, democracy is just not working, and the available
political parties do not give real political options to the people.....
and to correct this is also the process of reform of democracy... And so
much is happening all over the world right now...
But, I could not figure out, in this whole struggle, what is
multistakeholderism, beyond what we know as participatory democracy, and
why do business need to get political seats on par with (however
imperfectly) elected representatives plus their interactions with
people's groups or what is called as civil society... That is the point
someone needs to explain....
Well, on the UNGA point, yes there are only govs inside the UNGA, but
you were at the WGEC (CSTD working group on enhanced cooperation), where
more than half the room was non gov, talking at the same footing as
govs, and you know that a report of WGEC is given complete and undivided
attention by the UNGA, most often simply rubber stamped by it. Right...
That is participatory democracy working - though I really do not agree
with representatives of Dinsneyland and AT&T and BT being among the very
few precious non gov seats in such setting. That is completely not done
in participatory democracy, but that is MSism. We needed to have
representative of the diabled people, indigenous groups, feminists,
health activists, and so on, none f them were there... This is MSism.
parminder
>
> Best
>
> Nigel
>
>
>
> From: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>>
> Reply-To: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>>
> Date: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:21 PM
> To: "bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>"
> <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>>,
> "governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>"
> <governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>>
> Subject: Re: [bestbits] Three NETmundial submissions launched for
> endorsement at bestbits.net
>
>
> Hi Jeremy
>
> For quite some time now, my analysis/prediction about the efforts of
> ICANN plus (and whoever backs them) vis vis the NetMundial has been as
> follows;
>
> 1. the main aim was to stop Brazil from the path Its President's
> speech at the UN looked to be paving - that of engaging the global
> community in UN spaces for the needed global Internet governance
> mechanisms.... That aim has been achieved, at least for the time being...
>
> 2. To make an alluring offer to Brazil to get them off the track
> mentioned above, which was in terms of some vague promises about some
> real steps forward in terms of internationalisation of ICANN...
> However as NetMundial approaches, we hear less and less of anything
> concrete in this regard. Anyway, since the show was being arranged, it
> was found useful if some good text could be got into the NetMundial
> outcome docs on/*'multistakeholder decision making' including, and
> specifically, on global public policy issues*/. This latter is the
> primary objective at this point. And the mentioned parties have been
> going about in a completely unabashed manner - helped considerably by
> some unexplained high degree of bashfulness of the involved civil
> society. We saw 1 Net being formed from nowhere (sorry, now we know,
> from an ICANN board decision), it taking over the meeting's
> co-ownership, various shenanigans around selection of its steering
> committee (which in any case is constantly bypassed, and never seems
> to converse with the respective constituencies), imposition of a
> person with highly questionable standing and reputation as civil
> society leader of the meeting (about which Ian again recommends
> further bashful for civil society) , and now a sudden survey which
> will formulate the 1Net aka 'global internet community' view on
> Internet principles for submission to the netMundial..... and so
> on.... Believe me, you havent seen nothing yet. Wait for the days
> close to the meeting....
>
> And of course, the proposed view to be submitted on 1Net's behalf has
> this all important principle, "Decisions made with respect to Internet
> governance should only be made by bodies that allow free and equitable
> access to all stakeholders at all points in the decision-making
> process." Well of course. Two hoots to democracy!
>
> Now I shall come to the point, of my comments on the proposed
> submission to NetMundial submitted by Jeremy.
>
> I of course support and commend both APC Principles and IRP
> Principles - which seem the main burden of the submission.... BUT...
> /*
> *//*Can someone explain me the meaning of "equitable multistakeholder
> participation"*/ and whether it is different from what is meant in the
> above statement from 1Net's survey. If so, how.... More precisely, are
> you seeking that all stakeholders, including business reps, have equal
> part and role (as gov reps) in making decisions about public policies.
> Please address this point specifically.
>
> I hope those proposing this statement will explain this point. I think
> it is their responsibility to do so, instead of slipping in such
> concepts, what would in default be, somewhat surreptitiously, which
> many potential signees are apt to miss..
>
> Thanks
>
> parminder
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday 05 March 2014 01:30 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> With thanks to everyone for their hard work on the drafts, we are now
>> simultaneously launching three submissions for the NETmundial
>> meeting. These submissions are the end results of extensive
>> discussions on the Best Bits lists going back to last year, with a
>> final face-to-face review this week (particularly on the roadmap for
>> further evolution of the institutional submission) by those of you
>> who are present at RightsCon in San Francisco.
>>
>> The three complementary submissions, all of which are open for
>> endorsement separately, are:
>>
>> 1. Internet governance principles,
>> http://bestbits.net/netmundial-principles/
>> 2. Roadmap for the Further Evolution of the Internet Governance
>> Ecosystem -- institutional mechanisms,
>> http://bestbits.net/netmundial-roadmap/
>> 3. Roadmap for the Further Evolution of the Internet Governance
>> Ecosystem -- ICANN, http://bestbits.net/netmundial-icann/
>>
>>
>> These will be formally submitted to NETmundial on 8 March 2014, but
>> between now and then we are gathering as many endorsements for each
>> of the statements as we can. So please I would encourage everyone to
>> read the statements, to endorse each of them separately (if you agree
>> with them, of course), and then to spread the word through social
>> media, email or word of mouth.
>>
>> Thanks again to everyone involved, and we really hope to see your
>> endorsement on each of the submissions soon.
>>
>> --
>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
>> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org <http://e164.org>|awk
>> -F! '{print $3}'
>>
>> WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly
>> recommended to enable encryption at your end. For instructions, see
>> http://jere.my/l/pgp.
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140306/21228cde/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