[governance] Re: [bestbits] UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET MUNDIAL INITIATIVE

[parminder]

On Tuesday 18 November 2014 11:07 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
> Not really Parminder. As you know there are differing opinions within 
> civil society about this, and without clarity as regards how an 
> involvement with NMI would work – information we are seeking – it is 
> not possible for everyone to make an informed decision.

I see (1) readiness in general to go with the NM Initiative, given 
conditions of CS nomination are met, and (2) actual process and 
agreement (or not) of CSCG's role in CS nominees, as two different issues.

JNC statement only say that most CS group seem to have agreed to (1). Is 
this incorrect....

> Such matters as whether the NMI would want to maintain a right of veto 
> over selections suggested by CSCG would not matter to those who oppose 
> involvement under any circumstances, but would be significant factors 
> as regards considering involvement for others.

Exactly, that is my point. So, obviously, other CS groups do not oppose 
the NMI as such, other than perhaps possible differences on CS 
nominations to its coordination committee. What we say in JNC's 
statement, and the note 4 explaining the basis of our assertion is very 
clear

"**For example, on the basis of positive views expressed by ... (so and 
so organisations) .., the chair of the Civil Society Coordination Group 
(CSCG) has sent a very positive letter to NMI offering to organize a 
selection process for civil society representatives for NMI's 
coordination committee..."

Is this statement untrue?

Meanwhile, since it was an official letter written by you as CSCG head 
to WEF/ NMI , on basis on the above mentioned positive views of 
concerned CS organisations, why do you not just make that  letter public 
and people can make their own judgement.

We obviously cannot write our statements exactly, as for instance Jeremy 
would want us to.... However, we write what we write responsibly and 
with full justification. Please make the mentioned letter public to NMI/ 
WEF, and, as always, we are ready for a full discussion on this issue of 
who has expressed what view, and undertook what actions, and 
implications there of.

It is  really our not problem is some of the CS members might now be re 
considering their views on the NMI issue - in face of the recent 
statements, or otherwise... As you will see from the text, this was 
precisely the purpose of JNC's statement, and we would be happy to see 
movement in the direction of achieving this purpose. We really want CS 
groups to reconsider their position and refuse to endorse the NM 
Initiative.

parminder
> Ian
> *From:* parminder <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 18, 2014 4:12 PM
> *To:* bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> 
> ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET 
> MUNDIAL INITIATIVE
> On Tuesday 18 November 2014 04:23 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
>> UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET MUNDIAL INITIATIVE.
>> Please note that Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group 
>> (CSCG) participation in the new Net Mundial initiative is still under 
>> consideration. CSCG has written to the NMI Secretariat and 
>> Transitional Council suggesting that it play a co-ordinating role in 
>> the selection of civil society representatives in a coordinated 
>> bottom up manner, rather than these decisions being made by the 
>> Transitional Council (which has no civil society representation). 
>> This is still under discussion; however, we do not yet have a 
>> proposal with sufficient clarity for member coalitions to be able to 
>> decide on participation or not. While Just Net Coalition (JNC) has 
>> already determined it will not participate, other members are waiting 
>> for clarity on our proposal for a bottom up and inclusive procedure 
>> for determining civil society representatives before making any final 
>> decisions on participation.
>
> Does this not constitute an in principle agreement to participate by 
> the concerned CS actors, if NMI guys agrees to CSCG doing CS 
> nominations, or something close to that... Further, Is Fadi wrong in 
> taking that impression and making it public... I think you need to 
> make the facts such more clear and transparent about what is happening 
> within the CSCG, what decisions and actions it takes and so on... 
> parminder
>
>> Our letter to  the NMI Secretariat and Transitional Council in no way 
>> signifies that any or all CS organisations have made a final decision 
>> on whether to engage with the NMI in a formal selection process or to 
>> participate in the NMI process.
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      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/20141118/de374105/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