[governance] PINGO

Tue May 13 04:05:55 EDT 2014

Wolfgang Kleinwächter, Wolfgang
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

> I can not find in the transcripts any statement - with the exception
> of the four governments I mentioned in my article - which expressed
> formal reservations against the document.

In
http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETMundial-23April2014-Closing-Session-en.pdf
you can find the following statement:

"""
NIELS TEN OEVER:   

We  would  like  to  thank  the  Brazilian  government  for
organizing  the global  multistakeholder  meeting  on  the  future  of
Internet  governance. We,  as  a  diverse  group  of  civil  society
organizations  from  around  the world,  appreciate  having  been
part  of  the  process.    However,  we  are disappointed because the
outcome document fails to adequately reflect a number of our key
concerns.

The  lack  of  acknowledgment  of  net  neutrality  at  NETmundial  is
deeply disappointing.    Mass  surveillance  has  not  been
sufficiently  denounced as  being  inconsistent  with  human  rights
and  the  principle  of proportionality. 

And although the addition of language on Internet intermediary
liability is welcomed, the final text fails to ensure due process
safeguards which could  undermine  the  rights  to  freedom  of
expression  and  right to privacy.   

We  feel  that  this  document  has  not  sufficiently  moved  us
beyond  a status  quo  in  terms  of  the  protection  of  fundamental
rights  and  the balancing  of  power  and  influence  of  different
stakeholder  groups. Thank you. 
"""

Greetings,
Norbert

 I know that a number of
> civil society organisations and also other stakeholders from the
> private sector, governments and technical community were not
> satisfied with parts of the document. But to be "not satisfied"  is
> different from "formal reservations/opposition". In a
> multistakeholder process it is more or less unavoidable that "nobody
> is satisfied". To reach rough consensus means that there are many
> parties which did not get what they wanted. Otherwise it would be
> "full consensus". And it was very obvious that there was no full
> consensus for the NetMundial outcome document. Nevertheless, the Sao
> Paulo declaration has a special meaning. Basic elements - as the
> principles which are very balanced and represent to a high degree
> civil society values - got the support of the majority of all present
> stakeholders. This is, as I said, remarkable and new, compared to the
> previous documents which were limited in scope and support. The
> "limitations" are also relevant for the very interesting document
> adopted by the Council of the European Union (this is not the EU
> Commission and also not the Council of Europe). This is a document
> supported by the 27 member states of the EU. I have my doubts,
> whether the 193+ governments of the UN member states would support
> this document. Net Mundial was not the end of the discussion, in
> particular with regard to the Roadmap. It is very good that we get
> now more input into a the roadmap process which will lead us into the
> year 2020 and beyond. And the new EU council paper is a very
> substantial input. As a European I would be happy if governments from
> non-European countries would take this document as inspiration. I
> also recommend, that non-governmental stakeholders take this EU
> Council document as a serious contribution, in particular with regard
> to the respect for human rights. BTW, all EU member states are also
> members of the OECD and do also support the OECD Principles for
> Internet Policy making, which were opposed by CISAC (at least two
> principles). If you compare the two questionable OECD principles with
> Net Mundial than NetMundial looks much better from a civil society
> perspective. Best wishes wolfgang 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
> Gesendet: Mo 12.05.2014 17:32
> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Betreff: Re: [governance] PINGO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sunday 11 May 2014 02:12 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> > Hi,
> >  
> > here is my view how to deal with the section on Internet Principles
> > of the NetMundial Sai Paulo Declaration. 
> > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20140510_pingo_net_mundial_adopts_principles_on_internet_governance/
> 
> To quote your paper
> 
> "And this document is supported by the majority of governments, by the
> most recognized and respected leaders from the private sector, the
> gurus of the technical community and a broad range of civil society
> organizations."
> 
> Wolfgang, can you show evidence to the effect that NetMundial document
> is supported by a majority of world's governments. This is apart from
> the fact that a very large number of civil society organisations
> present at NetMundial opposed the outcome document, and I can tell
> you, an even greater number outside oppose it.
> 
> parminder
> 
> >  
> > wolfgang
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

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