[governance] Re: [bestbits] Roles and Responsibilities - CSTD working group on enhanced cooperation

[Norbert Bollow]

TA art. 35 is very very imperfect for a variety of reasons.

It also was dangerous ten years ago in ways which are not a real danger
today.

Today it is IMO an immediate and concrete danger that carelessly
designed (and thereby non-democratic) multistakeholder public policy
processes could give big business the power to effectively undermine
the human right of the peoples to democratic self-determination.

In the relevant international human rights treaty, the ICCPR, the legal
construct through which this human right is established is via the
public policy role of states: First it is declared that the peoples
have a right to self-determination, and later in the document the
right to democratic processes is established.

I am not asserting that this state-based model is the only possible
model of democracy, but it is what we have. I certainly don't want to
forsake it before a proven alternative is available.

Until then I will support TA art. 35 with its privileging of states.
From my perspective there is no need for Parminder to retract anything.

I agree of course that there are currently very real problems almost
every time that states try to get involved in a privileged role as
states in Internet governance. And I'm not talking just about the
various examples of totally non-democratic states here.

I propose to address these problems by means of measures such as those
proposed on http://wisdomtaskforce.org/

Greetings,
Norbert


Am Fri, 2 May 2014 21:58:47 +0900
schrieb Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>:

> Dear Parminder,
> 
> To the best of my knowledge, no civil society entity has supported
> paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda (paragraph 49 Geneva Declaration of
> Principles.)  It was the position of the Civil Society Plenary in
> Tunis that this language was unacceptable.  To the best of my
> knowledge this position has not changed.  As recently as last week in
> Sao Paulo it was a matter that unified civil society: clearly we
> oppose paragraph 35.
> 
> So it was very surprising to read that you, as a representative of
> civil society on the CSTD working group on enhanced cooperation
> should support this language, and in doing so associate yourself with
> business, Iran, Saudi Arabia, among others.
> 
> Please retract your comment supporting the Tunis Agenda text on roles
> and responsibilities as copied below from the transcript.  You have
> time to do so before the WG finishes its meeting later today.
> Paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda also below.
> 
> Please act immediately.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> >>PARMINDER JEET SINGH: THANK YOU, CHAIR. MY COMMENTS GO IN THE SAME
> >>DIRECTION AS THE SPEAKER PREVIOUS TO ME, MARILYN, THAT IT SHOULD BE
> >>RETAINED, THIS PARTICULAR PHRASE OF OUR RESPECTIVE ROLES AND
> >>RESPONSIBILITIES AND TO JUSTIFY IT, I MAY ADD THAT THE TUNIS AGENDA
> >>TALKS ABOUT THESE ROLES SPECIFICALLY IN THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC
> >>POLICY MAKING AND NOT GENERALLY IN VARIOUS OTHER SOCIAL ENTERPRISES
> >>AND ACTIVITIES ALL OF US GET INVOLVED IN. AND THIS PARAGRAPH ALSO
> >>ENDS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF ENHANCED COOPERATION WHICH IN MY AND MANY
> >>PEOPLE'S UNDERSTANDING IS SPECIFICALLY ONLY ABOUT PUBLIC POLICY
> >>MAKING. 
> IT IS IN THIS REGARD, AT LEAST IN MY MIND, I HAVE CLARITY ABOUT WHAT
> IS THE ROLE OF DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS BEING QUITE DIFFERENT TO ONE
> ANOTHER AND I DON'T APPRECIATE THAT NON-GOVERNMENTAL ACTORS WOULD
> HAVE THE SAME ROLE IN DECISION-MAKING MAKING THAN GOVERNMENTAL
> ACTORS. THAT SHOULD NOT BE ACCEPTABLE AT A GLOBAL LEVEL. THERE IS A
> REASON FOR US TO INSIST ON IT BECAUSE I REMEMBER IN THE SECOND
> MEETING, I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT PEOPLE ASKING FOR
> EQUAL ROLES AND ASKED WHETHER THEY REALLY ARE SEEKING AN EQUAL ROLE
> IN PUBLIC POLICY MAKING. I ASKED IT FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR
> REPRESENTATIVE WHO THEN RESPONDED TO SAID I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE
> PRIVATE SECTOR AND THEY SAY, YES, WE WANT TO AN EQUAL FOOTING OF
> DECISION-MAKING. THIS IS PART OF THE MEETING. IT IS THIS PART OF
> DEMOCRACY WHICH HAS ACUTELY BOTHERED US. I HAVE SAID THIS EARLIER.
> BUT I INSIST TO SAY THAT AGAIN BECAUSE THERE ARES INENCE ON -- THEIR
> INSISTENCE ON ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES COMES BACK AND AGAIN. FOR ME
> THAT IS IMPORTANT AND WE WOULD LIKE THAT PHRASE TO BE RETAINED. THANK
> YOU. 
> >>CHAIR MAJOR: THANK YOU, PARMINDER. 
> 
> Tunis Agenda
> 
> 35. We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both
> technical and public policy issues and should involve all
> stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international
> organizations. In this respect it is recognized that: a) Policy
> authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the sovereign
> right of States. They have rights and responsibilities for
> international Internet-related public policy issues. b) The private
> sector has had, and should continue to have, an important role in the
> development of the Internet, both in the technical and economic
> fields. c) Civil society has also played an important role on
> Internet matters, especially at community level, and should continue
> to play such a role. d) Intergovernmental organizations have had, and
> should continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of
> Internet-related public policy issues. e) International organizations
> have also had and should continue to have an important role in the
> development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant
> policies.
> 
> 


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