[governance] URGENT: Last call for feedback on CS participation in NETmundial Initiative

Lee W McKnight lmcknigh at syr.edu
Thu Nov 20 20:04:19 EST 2014 

If I may make a few comments, first on behalf of my dual national wife and kids ie Brazilian and US.


So far take-away message from the way the NMI discussion is playing out on Best Bits and the governance list is: one half of their identity is understood to play in global Internet governance a significant role.


And the other half gets critiqued from the left (JNC) and the technical (ISOC) community if it dares to presume to talk more about issues that after all were driven to some level of consensus...in Rio, with patronage of the Brazilian President.  With ICANN playing a key role in bringing the parties together.


As a 'pioneer' member of ISOC from way back in its founding days, and not Brazilian, I guess I should be fine with that myself. On other hand I was also engaged with ICANN even before its earliest days so I guess that makes me even more compromised to some : )


But I sill wonder if this is really the message cs wishes to send to the global south, that southern governments who dare to play also with power/world economy forces like WEF, are to speak only when spoken to.


I recall all the angst and worry pre-NetMundial, and pre-WCIT and pre-Plenipot, and etc - the issue ultimately for me is going into any process that is - a process - and not a fore-ordained conclusion, we can't know what will come of it.


Personally I would prefer if WEF and friends would invest more into IGF, as the Internet governance talkshop of all talkshops, but hey that's just me.


If NMI is reduced to yet another talk shop except it is Brazilians in a co-lead role....this is extra-bad how? If Brazilians 'appropriate' the name of an event that happened...in Brazil...this is terrible how?


ISOC and JNC and anyone else that wishes to ignore that talk and those recommendations can readily do so.


I am not volunteering and don;t have time myself, but why - more talk/dialogue and yes even gasp recommendations on international Internet public policy issues would be a bad thing is unclear, at least to my (half-)Brazilian kids.  Who may well be finding the tone of this whole conversation condescending and insulting. But of course I would not know myself, being from the hegemon of the north and all that.


Lee


PS: And...while this is going on, China can hold a 'world Internet summit' and invite selected cs folks and it is no big deal...and India boxes itself into and out of a Plenipot corner to no positive effect...while Putin can do what he wants....but if Brazil/cgi dare play with the big boys...ok got it. No further questions. Tudo bem!

________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> on behalf of Akinremi Peter Taiwo <compsoftnet at gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 5:49 PM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Deirdre Williams
Subject: Re: [governance] URGENT: Last call for feedback on CS participation in NETmundial Initiative


Well, I understand that this is a critical decision civil society need to make, as said before if civil society are not part of NMI and the platform turns to worth it, what will be our outcome?
I think instead of having two voices, we should sit down together(meetings) and analysis and rub mind on the issues of NMI to understand each others perspectives while strategically plan for any negative outcome of NMI.
This calls for wisdom, our presence is better than nothing for check and balance.

Cheers!!!
Peter

On Nov 20, 2014 9:44 PM, "Deirdre Williams" <williams.deirdre at gmail.com<mailto:williams.deirdre at gmail.com>> wrote:

I asked in an earlier post whether civil society has been manoeuvred into a position in which choosing not to be involved becomes not really an option? As civil society we have a very broad range of perspective and therefore it is much more difficult for this group to act together rapidly, as ISOC has done, when the nature of the issue itself is still doubtful. Other people have already reminded us of the hesitation before the NETmundial meeting in April, and the enthusiasm (in general) which greeted the outcomes of that meeting, although there are still some reservations – Renata just shared hers.

My sympathies lean towards a reluctance to provide legitimacy, but my common sense suggests the following:

  1.  As far as I can see the Netmundial Initiative will continue with or without us.

  2.  Civil Society is split now (and has been split for some time) so that any attempt at a boycott is likely to fail because it will be incomplete.

  3.  The invitation to join can be presented in such a way as to provide legitimacy even if not all of civil society agrees to accept. (This is what I meant by “manoeuvred” above.)

  4.  We have not been given a clear picture of what the initiative is – it may prove to be something that meets our approval – or not.

  5.  It is very important that any civil society representatives who join that committee should be people who go with an open mind. Those who disapprove are absenting themselves anyway; it would be better to have representatives who are initially neutral but open to be persuaded one way or the other.

  6.  Finally, should the initiative prove to be unacceptable, a well publicised walkout by the 5 civil society representatives (who are also representing “the world”) would be much easier to arrange and much more effective than a partial boycott before the meeting takes place.

The discussion at the Geneva Internet Conference about the Netmundial Initiative yesterday morning (Wednesday 19th) was useful. On Tuesday during “Same issues, different perspectives: overcoming policy silos in privacy and data protection”, one of the afternoon sessions, Brian Trammell, Senior Researcher, Communication Systems Group, ETH Zurich, presenting the “technical” perspective, said of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) that members are volunteers who “participate as individuals”. This is also true of the Internet Governance Caucus, and essentially of civil society as a whole. One of the freedoms that our society tries to provide is the right of the individual to follow the dictates of her/his own conscience. My own choice is a pragmatic one. It should in no way be seen as a criticism of anyone else's point of view or decision.

Deirdre

On 20 November 2014 11:41, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com<mailto:kichango at gmail.com>> wrote:
Fellas,
Some of us have raised questions about the views of the Brazilian party (CGI.br) in this NMI business. But I know they are in a delicate position and may be concerned to appear as judge and jury if they come out strong for a position (and we can expect which that position would be.) Flavio is not on the IGC list but he granted me the permission to forward to this list this message of his below, originally posted to the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group of ICANN's GNSO.
Best,

Mawaki


Fw: [NCSG-Discuss] UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET MUNDIAL INITIATIVE

On Wednesday, November 19, 2014 12:55 AM, Flávio Rech Wagner <flavio at INF.UFRGS.BR<mailto:flavio at INF.UFRGS.BR>> wrote:


Robin

I have been informed that the "transitional council" of the NMI - NETmundial Initiative (which contains representatives from ICANN, CGI.br and WEF and is provisory, until the 25 names of the permanent council have been defined) is having an intense dialogue with CSCG (the Civil Society Coordination Group) and, together, they shall come to a solution for appointing names to the council by consensus and fully respecting nominations from Civil Society. There is no intention whatsoever from the transitional council to indicate names in a closed, top-down manner and without full endorsement from CSCG.

The transitional council also expects to achieve similar solutions for appointing names that will represent other stakeholder groups.

Please notice that CGI.br (the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee), which is one of the entities proposing the NMI, would never agree with top-down, closed decisions that would strongly undermine CGI's legitimacy as a true bottom-up, multistakeholder body. CGI.br is completely committed to preserve the NETmundial principles in the implementation of the NMI.

Please remember also that, when NETmundial was proposed by the end of 2013, all of us in the global Internet Governance (IG) community, because of lack of information, were puzzled about its organization and possible success and outcomes. But the global community faced the challenge and transformed a vague idea into a successful event, with a true multistakeholder organization, with very open and transparent processes, and with a final document that was achieved by rough consensus and approved governance principles that were praised by most of the stakeholders (including human rights and other principles that are extremely valued by Civil Society).

So let's try to transform NMI, which is still also a vague idea, into something that is concrete and useful for the advancement of IG and that fully respects the principles enshrined in the NETmundial declaration.

Flávio
(NCUC member and member of the Board of CGI.br)




____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto: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




--
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto: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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20141121/ce812cde/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

More information about the Governance mailing list