[governance] India and Multistakehoolderism

[parminder]

On Tuesday 04 November 2014 11:13 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> FYI
>
> http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/features/smartbuy/tech-news/india-may-dilute-stand-on-net-control/article6524088.ece

Hi Wolfgang

Very interesting move, largely in keeping with how things have been in 
India I would say. But I do hope that with all these different pieces 
being moved India would soon be able to form a good and relatively 
complete picture of how how it sees IG, both at the global level and at 
Indian level.

Right now there are just too many ambiguities about what part of IG is 
being spoken of, and how is it proposed t be dealt with. You would of 
course have noted how muddled and inaccurate the following part of the 
press report is ..

"Globally, there is a debate on who should control the working of the 
Internet. At present, a US-based body called the Internet Corporation 
for Assigned Names and Numbers or ICANN, governs the broad functioning 
of the Internet."

Now if indeed the referred note is speaking about critical Internet 
resources management work, India and (indeed 90 percent of world's 
countries) have always supported ICANN and its family of insitutions to 
keep doing it. (In fact, on a somewhat different count, Just Net 
Coalition has asked for this system to be recognised and incorporated in 
international law and agreement, something which the latest India's 
position of IANA transition also asks for such an reconsigning internal 
law) ...

I will request you and others, lets stop talking whether MS or ML 
(multistakeholder or multilateral), but speak about what precise 
institutional system and how it works, or is supposed to work. Lets work 
on clear details and not slogans.

I have asked you a thousand times but you would not respond - do you 
think that the CoE Council on Internet issues (it is called media 
something, and with which you have worked) -  which takes expert inputs 
(like it did of your experts committee) and holds stakeholder 
consultations and then adopts what it thinks fit to adopt in the council 
which is inter-gov - as a multistakeholder system or not. If not, two 
questions (1) have you told them so much when you were appointed an 
expert and in your other numerous interactions with them and (2) what is 
your proposal as to  how the CoE council on Internet issues should 
work.  (I am giving this example only so that we can talk about exact 
and precise issues and institutional systems as well as possible 
alternatives.)

Everyone agrees that technical and day to day administration should be 
done by MS systems, within higher public policy principles that should 
be administered in a arms length manner with clearly laid out process. 
However *determining" public policy issues is a different matter, and it 
should involve deep stakeholder consultations but needs decision making 
by people's representatives alone... This is my view, and if yours is 
different lets hear about it. But on a precise and clear level, and not 
theoretical abstract stuff...

parminder



>


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