[governance] Response to Jeremy's insinuations (was Re: Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony...)

[Norbert Bollow]

Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> So let me get this straight: you are happy to accept global
> multi-stakeholder governance where there is consensus (including of
> governments), but where there isn't, then national parliaments get to
> decide.   

Yes, absolutely. In fact it's part of the public record that I've been
proposing this for a couple of years.

Nota bene, while this proposal is consistent with JNC's understanding
of the word "democratic", it's at the current stage still just a
personal proposal from me. JNC has not yet endorsed any concrete
proposal or proposals for implementing our demand for "platforms and
mechanisms for global governance of the Internet that are democratic
and participative".

In JNC we have started quite some time ago to work on a paper on
democratic governance in the context of the Internet, but this is not
finished yet. I will let this list know when it has been published.

By the way, I have just updated the summary of the proposal on
http://WisdomTaskForce.org/ with a couple of paragraphs of explanation
on why IMO, open-participation consensus-seeking processes can in this
way be effectively applied to the challenges of developing *global*
public policy, without overlooking the fact that it is not always
possible to reach consensus.


> Well, I'm glad we cleared that up, then.  

Do I understand you right that you will support the demand that
multistakeholder governance must be conducted in a manner which is
democratic, if a wording can be found which makes clear that
"democratic" is meant in the sense of the literal meaning of the word
and not as any kind of coded language for "maintaining primacy of
governments" or for multilateralism?

I would have thought that putting the word "democratic" next to the
word "multistakeholder" already makes abundantly clear that there it
cannot possibly mean anything like "maintaining primacy of
governments".

But sure, why not look for an even clearer way to express the demand
that global multistakeholder governance of public policy matters must be
really, really democratic, in the sense of the real meaning of the word.

Proposals for good formulations (i.e. formulations which really, really
cannot be misinterpreted as coded language for anything else, and which
also don't overuse a word like "really" like I've just done) are very
welcome.


In relation to the meeting in Delhi from which JNC emerged, Jeremy
wrote:
> I do however, at least, know for
> certain of individuals (not me) who were specifically excluded from
> attending because of their views.  

Yes, sure, that meeting was never intended to be a general inclusive
forum. Quite on the contrary, it was intended to be a meeting of people
who would be roughly in agreement. To my best knowledge, no claim to
the contrary has ever been made.

The relevant part of http://justnetcoalition.org/reply-jeremy-malcolm
says:

"""
There is nothing wrong with calling a meeting of broadly like-minded
people and/or organizations with an intention to develop a joint
declaration or to form a coalition. And there is nothing wrong when
such a meeting is kept invitation-only and restricted to people and
groups who are expected to be in broad agreement. In fact, a joint
declaration and a coalition are centrally based on agreeing about
something. By contrast, a forum is about bringing together a variety
of views and perspectives.

In the case of the meeting in Delhi of February 14-15, 2014, the
intention was to develop a joint declaration, and this intention
together with the intended political flavor of this declaration were
stated clearly as the subtitle of the "meeting note" that was sent to
all invitees. This subtitle was: "An international meeting to formulate
a progressive response to issues of global governance of the Internet."
The formation of a formal coalition was not planned, it is something
that emerged out of the dynamics of the meeting.
"""

Greetings,
Norbert
co-convenor, Just Net Coalition (JNC)
http://JustNetCoalition.org

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