AW: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: [discuss] JNC statement on WEF's Net Mundial Initiative

Jean-Christophe Nothias jeanchristophe.nothias at gmail.com
Tue Nov 18 11:30:26 EST 2014 

Wolfgang,

Thanks for sharing your impression of what is to be the ICANN/WEF/CGIbr initiative. It brings even more questions about what is it really that is in the making. Probably because you are working currently at ICANN, that might explain why your insider vision is relatively different from what others are able to tell us. (BY the way, have you had time to think about you being seated at the NMI, but then under which hat: one more seat for ICANN, or one more seat for ICANN?

We all have in mind the idea that ICANN does not feel fully legitimate to address "INTERNET PUBLIC POLICY" issues, and therefore called for reinforcement of some sort. But could you explain how the WEF and its cohort of corps are even more legitimate to handle these kind of issues? I am wondering also what is the connection between privacy and Human Rights and the WEF, the ICANN and the CGIbr. What's the idea there? Has Pr. Klaus Schwab a new idea for himself to end his lasting career to go into human rights from economy? Tell us about that. The general manager of the WEF tells on the NMI website, that this is all about politics, and money. Somehow what Louis Pouzin said earlier today when mapping the IG.

Also, if according to your CEO at ICANN, Netmundial has been a moment for the "Internet community"  -not sure what it is exactly - to agree upon a set of common principles, where does the Sao Paulo roadmap (unseen at this stage by many of us) tell us that the WEF is a critical asset to define new internet governance mechanisms or process or whatever is on their mind?

If the WEF wishes to edit a report about new ideas regarding the Internet and its governance, we welcome all contributions, but for what superior reasons do we need to have this new "thing" when the most critical thing Civil Society should preferably care about how to create a robust and sustainable funding for the IGF. Maybe the WEF and ICANN wish to provide some financing to IGF, and re-energize it, and call for greater efficiency, transparency and accountability of the IGF.

I think JNC has given a very clear and strong explanation about why CS should refrain from participating in such platform. As did ISOC. Not exactly small players in IG.

Thanks
JC


Le 18 nov. 2014 à 15:08, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang a écrit :

> I see NMI as an initiative which moves forward with innovative policy ideas into still unknown territory. One recommendation of NetMundial in Sau Paulo was to encourage the formation of national multistakeholder Internet Governance platforms which will help to deals with the local Internet Governance issues, taking into account the global and regional discussions. Zhis wold be a concret step where CS can ans has to become a driving force. NMI is a good opportunity a. to help the launch of such national platforms and b. to link them together in a decentralized and diversified "Internet Governance Web" which is based on the local realities, needs and challenges. 
> 
> Wolfgang
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Baudouin Schombe
> Gesendet: Di 18.11.2014 14:51
> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow
> Cc: &lt,bestbits at lists.bestbits.net&gt,
> Betreff: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: [discuss] JNC statement on WEF's Net Mundial Initiative
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> My question becomes increasingly growing:
> 1. What happens to the NetMundial?
> 2. NetMundial initiative is different from NetMundial launched in Brazil?
> 3. All these groupings of civil society are more partisan and exclusive
> selections. It looks like copineries and friendships circles.
> I think we should take into account national and regional realities. Whether
> we talk about IGF or NetMundial we need from considerations of each
> country because
> everything is based on some national issues is our continental location.
> All these debates within civil society suggests a crisis of leadership with
> all its consequences.
> What we want exactly?
> With representation from civil society in UNCTAD, there has been exclusion;
> for MAG, so many asctuces and in the current situation for NetMundial again
> and again discriminatory policies.
> Ultimately, whatever the plurality of civil society, should understand that
> many plurality of concepts also need?
> 
> Baudouin
> 
> 
> 2014-11-18 14:04 GMT+01:00 Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>:
> 
>> Jeremy Malcolm (the representative of Best Bits in CSCG) wrote:
>> 
>>> Via Norbert I have requested that JNC issue a public apology for
>>> wrongly stating in this article, along with much other dumping on
>>> civil society colleagues, that Best Bits is supporting the NETmundial
>>> Initiative.
>> 
>> Before I reply to the substance of this accusation of lying, let me
>> quickly comment on why these facts (about which JNC is being accused of
>> having told a lie) have some importance: In view of the phenomenon
>> which were calling "the caravan for a neo-liberal capture of global
>> governance", it would in our view be a huge step forward if the support
>> for that could be reduced to those who are willing to publicly admit
>> and defend their support for it. From this perspective, it is a very
>> serious and significant systemic problem in civil society when actions
>> are taken which are in their effect supportive of this "caravan", but
>> where those who take or explicitly support such action get away with
>> simply disclaiming responsibility, or even claiming that it didn't
>> happen. (By contrast it is a legitimate course of action for any of the
>> concerned parties to admit to having made a mistake, and to consequently
>> change their stance.)
>> 
>> Now to the substance of what we're accused of having been untruthful
>> about...
>> 
>> The footnote which is referenced in this demand for an apology (and
>> which is the only place where any mention of Best Bits is made) reads in
>> full as follows:
>> 
>>  For example, on the basis of positive views expressed by APC,
>>  BestBits, Diplo and NCSG, 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. Until now, only the Just Net Coalition
>>  (JNC) has opposed this plan, and JNC will refuse to participate if it
>>  goes forward. The other member organizations of CSCG are: Association
>>  for Progressive Communications (APC), Best Bits, Civicus, Diplo
>>  Foundation, Internet Governance Caucus (IGC), Non-Commercial
>>  Stakeholders Group (NCSG).
>> 
>> For context, this footnote is given in support of the assertion that
>> some "sections of civil society currently active in the area of Internet
>> ... have accepted the invitation from global corporate and other
>> elites to participate in the NetMundial Initiative".
>> 
>> I maintain that the concerned letter
>> 
>> * is indeed very positive, and that
>> 
>> * it offers to organize a selection process for civil society
>>  representatives for NMI's coordination committee, and that
>> 
>> * it in fact represents acceptance in principle of the fundamental
>>  concept of NMI and the invitation to participate.
>> 
>> This is certainly how we in JNC read the letter, and it appears that
>> also ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé (one of the recipients) is understanding
>> the letter similarly, as Avri tweeted yesterday: "Fadi, praised the
>> letter from civil society asking to select is own members of the #NMI
>> council and legitimizing the initiative. #igeneva"
>> 
>> But it is probably necessary at this point for everyone here to be
>> given the opportunity to be able to make up their minds for themselves
>> on whether, as JNC claims, this letter expresses acceptance in
>> principle of NMI.
>> 
>> After all, JNC has in effect been accused of lying. The only way to
>> effectively counteract such an accusation is to present evidence that
>> what we're saying is in fact the truth about these events.
>> 
>> JNC will of course be very happy if (as we're in fact suggesting in the
>> statement) now enough CSCG members change their position so that on the
>> basis of that the CSCG position changes, and a corresponding letter is
>> sent which contradicts the initial quite positive stance. We would
>> certainly acknowledge such a welcome development in an updated version
>> of the statement.
>> 
>> So here is the text of the concerned letter from CSCG's chair to NMI:
>> 
>> """
>>    Dear Virgilio, Fadi and Richard,
>> 
>>    RE: NETMUNDIAL INITIATIVE COORDINATION COUNCIL
>> 
>>    I am writing to you on behalf of the Internet Governance Civil
>>    Society Coordination Group (CSCG), in response to your call for
>>    nominations for a Coordination Council for the new NetMundial
>>    Initiative.
>> 
>>    I think you all know something of our organisation. We are a
>>    "coalition of coalitions" of the major civil society groups working
>>    on internet governance issues, formed specifically to ensure a
>>    co-ordinated civil society response and conduit when it comes to
>>    making civil society appointments to outside bodies.
>> 
>>    Our reach through the represented member coalitions (Internet
>>    Governance Caucus, Association for Progressive Communications,
>>    Diplo Foundation, Just Net Coalition, Best Bits, Civicus, and Non
>>    Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN) extends to some thousands
>>    of organisations. We provided the nominations for civil society
>>    members appointed to various committees for the original NetMundial
>>    initiative in Brazil and the 1net initiative, as well as
>>    nominations for the recent IGF Multistakeholder Advisory Group
>>    renewal.
>> 
>>    A number of us listened in and participated on your webinar last
>>    week. We are very pleased to see an effort underway to
>>    collaboratively deal with some of the evolving issues in the
>>    internet governance arena; and also pleased to see your strong
>>    commitment to the NetMundial principles, and to a bottom up process
>>    in bringing this into action.
>> 
>>    We have noted carefully the procedures outlined on your website for
>>    nominations, and the commitment to one civil society representative
>>    for each of the five regions outlined. You are aware of our
>>    concerns, which I am sure you share, that the selection processes
>>    be credible, involve stakeholder groups, and, as your nomination
>>    process states, "formed through a bottom-up process, inspired by
>>    the open and transparent approach employed by the organizers of the
>>    São Paulo NETmundial meeting".
>> 
>>    We believe this can best be achieved if we work closely with you to
>>    ensure that the civil society representation, and involvement in
>>    selection of its representatives, is as strong, credible and
>>    effective as possible, and make the following suggestions with this
>>    end in mind.
>> 
>>    SUGGESTION ONE
>> 
>>    Although we could go through a separate nomination process and
>>    forward a number of names to you, it seems to us that in the
>>    current situation a more workable process would be to encourage
>>    suitable civil society people to nominate as per your process, but
>>    then work with you at the close of nominations to provide our
>>    recommendations on the most suitable candidates. Depending on
>>    circumstances, we could give you one recommended name per region,
>>    or we could give a maximum of say three suitable names per region,
>>    to enable you to consider intra-regional balance across stakeholder
>>    groups.
>> 
>>    We would like your feedback on this option. If we were to follow
>>    this process, we would need to receive from you full details of
>>    each nomination received for civil society. We could undertake to
>>    give completed recommendations within a week of the closing date;
>>    ie by December 13. We employ well developed processes for achieving
>>    such an outcome in a credible manner and can assure you than
>>    necessary confidentiality in dealing with these documents would be
>>    maintained.
>> 
>>    SUGGESTION TWO
>> 
>>    Additionally, we could have a representative work with you  (the
>>    transitional committee members) on finalising selections, and
>>    writing up the rationale for decisions. We appreciate that if one
>>    of us takes up such a role, the deliberations would be subject to
>>    complete confidentiality, and this would be a facilitating role to
>>    ensure the best possible selections. We would welcome your feedback
>>    on this additional option as well.
>> 
>>    TIME CONSTRAINTS
>> 
>>    If we are to proceed with one or both of these options, we would
>>    need to have your confirmation as to our participation in this
>>    manner fairly quickly, so that we can inform our colleagues. Please
>>    if possible get back to us this week, or advise when you will be
>>    able to respond.
>> 
>>    We look forward to working with you and to a highly successful
>>    collaborative initiative to address some important issues of mutual
>>    concern. We would like to see a strong, widely endorsed, and
>>    effective civil society presence in developing this initiative, and
>>    look forward to working with you to achieve this.
>> 
>>    Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
>> 
>>    Sincerely,
>> 
>>    Ian Peter
>>    Independent Chair
>> """
>> 
>> Greetings,
>> Norbert
>> 
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> *SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN*
> 
> 
> *COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFEC*
> 
> *ICANN/AFRALO Member*
> *ISOC Member*
> Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512
> email                  : b.schombe at gmail.com
> skype                 : b.schombe
> blog                    : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


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