[governance] RE: [bestbits] CSCG - participation in selection of civil society representatives for NMI Coordination Council

Wed Nov 26 15:49:24 EST 2014

Rather than focusing on a specific set of processes (that of the CSCG) or the actions of an individual within that process, which I have no doubt were conducted with the highest degrees of probity and judiciousness, I think the follow up-discussion to the taking of a position by certain segments of IG CS should be to address the substance and the consequences of that commitment into which IG CS has apparently now entered.

The issue being addressed is extremely simple and straightforward.

Will Internet Governance associated Civil Society engage with and thus endorse/validate/legitimate the WEF/ICANN initiated process for responding to Internet Governance issues beyond the simply technical?

That this discussion with the NMI has been primarily about ensuring the engagement and thus legitimation by CS of the NMI is quite clear from the last minute efforts to cloak the initiative in the presumed civil society legitimacy of CGI.br.

That the particular details of that engagement/legitimation by CS are of little concern to the NMI is also quite evident from their eagerness to negotiate with the CSCG and apparently make whatever concessions were necessary in order to ensure that engagement.

By engaging in the NMI process under whatever conditions and limitations, it should be quite clear that IG CS has endorsed and legitimated the NMI global (Internet) Governance process.

The consequences of this action and this “commitment” are potentially extremely, even historically significant. (Suggesting that one can change one’s mind and withdraw half way through the process is simply a face-saving device.)  

The WEF in its various presentations and documents is quite transparent that they have every intention of introducing similar such processes throughout the entire range of global issues.  They have also made it quite evident that these processes will actively include the global corporate sector and given the nature of the WEF one presumes that this will consist of (and from their perspective be restricted to) the global corporate and other elites.

It is quite clear that IG CS has endorsed and legitimated the global elite’s corporatist agenda.

Mike

From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Anriette Esterhuysen
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 11:27 AM
To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
Subject: Re: [bestbits] CSCG - participation in selection of civil society representatives for NMI Coordination Council

Thanks for this Ian, and to others on the CSCG. This was a difficult process and I feel you handled it with care and fairness.

Anriette

On 26/11/2014 11:55, Ian Peter wrote:

Dear Civil Society members,

After a substantial consultation with members across many different constituencies, the Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) has decided that, in accordance with its procedures and with the conditions in the letter below, it will engage in the process of selection of self nominated civil society representatives for the Co ordination Council of the Netmundial Initiative (NMI). 

In doing so, we acknowledge and respect that Just Net Coalition has determined not to engage in this process, and that there are many civil society people in other coalitions who would also prefer not to engage at this time.

For those who choose to engage; if you wish to be a candidate, you must complete the form which can be found at https://www.netmundial.org/coordination-council-nominations, together with the associated documentation, by December 6. Please note that CSCG will not be endorsing nominations but playing a selection role as outlined in the letter below.

Thank you everyone who participated in this consultation and freely expressed their opinions. Below is a letter recently sent to the organisers outlining CSCG’s position and involvement.

 LETTER TO NMI TRANSITIONAL COUNCIL

Dear Virgilio, Richard and Fadi,

As members of the Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG), we write to express our appreciation for your openness in working with us to negotiate the terms of civil society’s participation in the NETmundial Initiative; in particular, by accommodating our expectation, drawn from the NETmundial Principles, that if we are to participate on the Coordination Council, we should nominate our own representatives.

Since our initial agreement on this principle, we have been consulting with our constituents about whether civil society ought to avail itself of this opportunity at all.  We must say that this has been a difficult question, at the end of which there remain some very significant misgivings across a broad segment of civil society about the merits of our prospective involvement.

Among the underlying concerns of many are that the involvement of the World Economic Forum in the initiative signals an attempt by economic and political elites to secure a central role in Internet governance; that the Initiative has been organised in a top-down manner that privileges its three promoters above other stakeholders; and that devoting time and resources to the Initiative may detract from other processes such as the Internet Governance Forum.

On the other hand, others recognise the opportunity that exists for civil society to help shape the NETmundial Initiative into a mechanism (but not the only mechanism) that can advance the NETmundial roadmap. Despite significant shortcomings in the NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement stemming from influence exerted by powerful actors towards the end of the process, much of the document, including the roadmap, does enjoy broad civil society support.

OUR INVOLVEMENT AND PROCESS

In the end we have decided to facilitate the involvement of those from civil society who do wish to apply for membership of the Coordination Council, while acknowledging others have decided as a matter of principle that they do not wish to be involved—and indeed would rather that civil society did not participate at all. We acknowledge and respect that our colleagues from Just Net Coalition have taken that position and will not be participating with us in this exercise.

The process we have agreed to work with is

1. At the close of nominations (December 6), CSCG Nomcom will review all nominations for civil society participation and evaluate each candidate’s suitability.

2. CSCG Nomcom will recommend one candidate per geographic region, and submits names to Transitional Council with reasons.

3. If necessary, NMI Transitional Council will convene a (virtual) meeting with CSCG Nomcom to discuss any issues arising, with a view to reaching a rough consensus agreement if there are any issues with our nominations. If there is a strong dissenting voice from another area of civil society they may also be invited to participate after discussion.

CONDITIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

Although we will work with the NETmundial Initiative’s organising partners to select willing civil society representatives from amongst those who self-nominate through the Initiative’s nomination process, we also outline five simple conditions that we believe representatives are likely to affirm following their appointment to the Coordination Council:

1. We would like the Co-ordination Council to discuss whether CGI.br, WEF and ICANN should have permanent membership of the Coordination Council and what that implies. Whilst it is acknowledged that the above organisations are jointly funding the operational expenses of the Initiative for its first year, this might not remain so. We are not convinced that funding support is sufficient justification for such a role, and we believe that the full Coordination Council itself should approve any permanent seats and what that implies.

2. To the extent that a stated objective of the Coordination Council is "promoting the distributed Internet governance model,” we want to point out that the status quo in Internet governance does not represent the fulfilment of this model. The NETmundial Initiative should not be used to legitimise existing inequalities and deficiencies of the present system and should not hold civil society back from advocating necessary reforms.

3. While we acknowledge the progressive elements of the NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement, it is not the final and definitive statement of Internet governance principles; indeed the Statement itself acknowledges that it is only a work in progress. So we do not see the NETmundial roadmap as an immutable document. We look forward to its refinement and/or augmentation and hope that NMI ensures a bottom up collaborative process to undertake this work.

4. A key performance indicator for the NETmundial Initiative must be the extent to which its activities strengthen and support the Internet Governance Forum, which remains the most significant global hub for general multi-stakeholder Internet governance policy discussions. If the IGF develops the capacity to assume further activities that currently might not fall within their capabilities, this should be facilitated, not opposed.

5. We will wish to evaluate from time to time whether this engagement is providing effective and worthwhile results for our constituencies.

We trust that our participation in this Initiative can be accepted with these conditions, and we look forward to working with you to select a balanced, inclusive and capable slate of civil society nominees to join the Coordination Council.

Sincerely,

CSCG Nomcom for NMI Co ordination Council 

Participating member coalitions

Association for Progressive Communications, represented by Chat Garcia Ramilo, Deputy Executive Director

Best Bits, represented by Jeremy Malcolm, Steering Committee member

Diplo Foundation, represented by Ginger (Virginia) Paque, Internet Governance Programmes

Internet Governance Caucus, represented by Dr Mawaki Chango, Co-Coordinator

The Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group, (NCSG) represented by Robin Gross, NCSG Executive Committee

Ian Peter, Independent Chair

____________________________________________________________
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

-- 
`````````````````````````````````
anriette esterhuysen
executive director
association for progressive communications
po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
anriette at apc.org
www.apc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20141126/9a58668b/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