[IRPCoalition] [governance] Re: [bestbits] Looking for your input - NetMundial Initiative
Hanane Boujemi
simsima25 at gmail.com
Mon Aug 25 14:11:04 EEST 2014
Thanks Carolina for keeping us in the loop. While the new list of invited
people is more balanced ( unlike the leaked doc). I think specific
attention has to be allocated to having a concrete outcome out of this
meeting which will feed into the whole process. The list of concerns and
what Nneena added is in my opinion sufficient .
Hanane
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Nnenna Nwakanma <nnenna75 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all
>
> The position of the World Wide Web Foundation is open and on the blog:
> https://webfoundation.org/2014/08/the-fall-of-internet-governance/
>
> SNIP = = =
>
> Here are the proposals we’ll be bringing to these forums to help ensure
> that international commitment leverages change on the ground:
>
> - *Commit to policy coherence.* Companies and governments who espouse
> participatory, democratic processes and defend human rights in Internet
> governance forums should not turn around and negotiate away our Web rights
> in secretive negotiations on topics such as digital copyright,
> cybersecurity, spectrum licensing and surveillance cooperation.
> - *Popularise the issues. *Companies won’t change until they feel
> their profits are threatened. Governments won’t change unless they fear
> being voted out of power. So we need a collective effort to ensure that
> people around the globe understand and care about these issues. We’re
> playing our part by leading the Web We Want <http://webwewant.org/>
> campaign — and as part of this we’re planning a major festival with the UK’s
> Southbank Centre
> <http://www.southbankcentre.co.uk/whatson/festivals-series/web-we-want>,
> which will take place across three weekends, beginning in September. We
> also fund and connect local activists working for a free and open Web all
> over the world, from Privacy Cafes
> <https://webwewant.org/projects/The_Cryptoparty_Tour_by_Privacy_Cafe>
> in the Netherlands, to public awareness efforts and advocacy campaigns in
> Mexico <https://webwewant.org/projects/CriptoRally_in_Mexico>, Nigeria
> <https://webwewant.org/projects/Web_We_Want_Radio_Phone_Ins> and beyond
> <https://webwewant.org/news/Announcing_the_Web_25_Year_of_Action_Grants>.
> Through our Web Index <http://www.thewebindex.org/> project, we’re
> tracking the performance of countries around the world on digital rights
> issues such as access, affordability, and online privacy. How can you help?
> - *Include more voices.* Technical guidance from “Internet Governance
> Experts” is critical in this field to avoid policy blunders, but the
> conversation is too important to be left to them alone. Representatives of
> other constituencies need to turn their minds to this issue and put forward
> solutions. The World Economic Forum initiative will reach wider business
> interests beyond the tech sector, which is positive in itself — but not
> everybody gets to go to Davos. We need equally creative and well-resourced
> ways to engage small-medium enterprises and start-ups, union leaders, the
> arts and culture community, anti-poverty campaigners, women’s rights
> groups, youth movements, parliamentarians and more.
> - *Open up.* Internet governance affects everyone, and so discussions
> should happen in the open, supported by transparent mechanisms that
> strengthen the accountability of governments, technical bodies, and
> technology corporations to the public. The Internet Governance Forum is to
> be commended for live-streaming their sessions, and we call on the
> organisers of the NETmundial Initiative and the Plenipotentiary to do the
> same. We’ll be providing full and honest write-ups of all our participation
> here too.
> - *Invest in national level change. *International norms are important
> — and we’ve gone as far as to call for a global “Magna Carta” for the
> Internet. Yet it is national level laws, regulations, business practices,
> and market incentives that most powerfully shape the Internet—for better or
> worse. It’s time for a concerted effort to build and pass an “Internet bill
> of rights” in every country that will enshrine citizens’ rights to access,
> privacy, and freedom of expression and association online. To do this
> requires sustained attention, political leadership, and investment in the
> capacity and resources of local civil society.
>
> SNIP = = =
>
>
> Nnenna
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 6:00 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
> wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi Adam,
>>
>> good questions. I also support Rauls approach. Key point at this stage is
>> to broaden the support for the IGF and NMI is one great option to do this.
>> BTW, I got yesterday an invitation to join the Geneva meeting but I can not
>> go due to our 14th Meeting of the ICANN Studienkreis in Sofia (Bulgaria),
>> August 28/29.
>>
>> In the light of the Monday Meeting in Istanbul we should use the IGC
>> Meeting on Friday to enhance a CSmid-term strategy.
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>>
>>
>> DAM;
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Adam
>> Gesendet: Sa 23.08.2014 14:38
>> An: Carolina Rossini
>> Cc: Brett Solomon; <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>
>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org;
>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org IGC
>> Betreff: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Looking for your input - NetMundial
>> Initiative
>>
>> Dear Carolina,
>>
>> Thank you for sharing this. A few comments below.
>>
>>
>> On Aug 23, 2014, at 9:24 AM, Carolina Rossini wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Dear all,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > As some of you might have heard and also seen the leaked documents, the
>> World Economic Forum, supported by ICANN, will host the workshop
>> "NetMundial Initiative" on 28th of August, in Geneva.
>> >
>> >
>> > Besides leaked documents, an "official" site is now up (as of
>> yesterday) at http://www.weforum.org/issues/global-internet-governance,
>> with list of participants, agenda, a short briefing and a FAQ. It worth
>> reading it - the FAQ is a very "interesting" piece. See it here -
>> http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_2NETmundialInitiativeFAQ.pdf.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Shame it had to leak. Fadi announced the initiative at the ICANN meeting
>> in London (around 23rd June) and the lead CS participants were already
>> known at that time. But only rumor, no information, until the leak of
>> course...
>>
>>
>> > Background regarding invitations and communication with NMI organizers:
>> None of the CS members invited to the workshop know exactly how the
>> selection process happened. In my personal case, I heard I was being
>> invited from colleagues in Brazil, but you can refer to Brett's previous
>> email (I paste it below) regarding to some of our earlier concerns
>> regarding the lack of transparency related to the invitation process.
>> >
>> >
>> > Yesterday, a group of CS members had a call with Fadi and folks from
>> the WEF - the first of its kind. The call was arranged in response to a
>> request from CS invited for the Geneva meeting.
>>
>>
>> Who were the other "civil society" people who joined the call with
>> Fadi/WEF?
>>
>> And news on membership of the Steering Committee?
>>
>>
>> > Below are some key concerns that were drafted ahead of the call. A
>> primary theme on the call was lack of transparency and failure to
>> adequately engage CS as part of the planning process for this workshop and
>> its follow-up processes. We also conveyed how problematic that it was
>> about the lack of southern CS representation.
>>
>>
>> Except for yourself, is there anyone? Skimming the participant list, the
>> only other person I recognize as having a experience of Internet governance
>> at national/regional level global south is Barrack Otieno (tech community,
>> Kenya and East Africa IGFs and other).
>>
>>
>> > Besides the issues below, and in regard to participation, we asked
>> ICANN and WEF to let CS chose its own representatives and that the
>> representation should rotate, so it is inclusive.
>>
>>
>> from <http://www.weforum.org/issues/global-internet-governance> this
>> initiative is "Inspired by the NETmundial..." "Carry forward the spirit of
>> NETmundial..."'
>>
>> NETmundial document is couldn't be clearer "Stakeholder representatives
>> appointed to multistakeholder Internet governance processes should be
>> selected through open, democratic, and transparent processes. Different
>> stakeholder groups should self-manage their processes based on inclusive,
>> publicly known, well defined and accountable mechanisms."
>>
>> Please ask WEF to cut the sweet words and either follow the "spirit" or
>> find another brand :-) Quite an issue over this during the lead-up to
>> NETmundial. Should be a civil society non-negotiable.
>>
>>
>> > We also asked for remote participation and that the WEF sets a platform
>> for remote commentary, which should happen in advance, during and after the
>> meeting. The initiative was presented to us as an experiment that will
>> initially last for roughly 6 months. Nobody from CS who is attending the
>> workshop has decided to publicly support or not the initiative.
>>
>>
>> Will you attend as representatives of civil society or for your own
>> organizations?
>>
>> Is WEF (etc) covering costs of participation, travel to Geneva?
>>
>>
>> > At the workshop, we will observe, understand what is still up in the
>> air and what may have been decided in advance by the conveners, and then
>> decide. But for that to happen, it would be very helpful to hear more in
>> the main IG lists.
>> >
>> >
>> > So, the primary purpose of this email is to reach out to you with a
>> very practical ask: The agenda presents a series of questions this
>> "Initiative" wants to address. Those on the call thought it would be a good
>> idea to ask in a series of CS lists involved in IG for your views and
>> comments regarding those questions. Refer to the agenda here:
>> http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_3NETmundialInitiativeLaunchAgenda.pdf
>> >
>> > It would be extremely helpful to those attending to get your input on
>> the questions and issues presented in the agenda by Tuesday Aug 26, so we
>> can incorporate your thoughts and comments into our interventions at the
>> workshop. Please let us know if you have any other questions or concerns.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Long way to go for an agenda doesn't have much time for discussion.
>>
>> Topic that most interests me is (from the NETmundial document) "There is
>> a need to develop multistakeholder mechanisms at the national level owing
>> to the fact that a good portion of Internet governance issues should be
>> tackled at this level. National multistakeholder mechanisms should serve as
>> a link between local discussions and regional and global instances.
>> Therefore a fluent coordination and dialogue across those different
>> dimensions is essential." Two items on the agenda seem to address this.
>>
>> and text I think perhaps helpful :
>>
>> "National and regional level Internet governance structures and
>> mechanisms must emerge, guided by the same global principles to ensure
>> alignment [*]. The synchronization between the different levels ensures a
>> healthy, inclusive, and balanced stakeholder representation locally while
>> contributing to the coordination of activities taking place at the global
>> level and avoiding additional frictions in the Internet."
>>
>> [* i.e. NETmunudal principles, and text from the Panel On Global Internet
>> Cooperation and Governance Mechanisms, contribution to NETmundial
>> http://internetgovernancepanel.org/ ]
>>
>> How can this new WEF initiative help develop, support/sustain such
>> national level mechanisms, will the members commit to supporting such
>> activities. Does need commitment, we have been talking about such
>> mechanisms since 2000/01.
>>
>> The bullets below look good.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> (not subscribed to redlatam at lists.accessnow.org, igcbp-talk <
>> igcbp-talk at googlegroups.com> and steering at lists.bestbits.net so removed
>> from cc list, but added "governance at lists.igcaucus.org IGC" <
>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org>)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > C
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > .
>> > Welcome the interest and desire of ICANN and the WEF to leverage and
>> further build on the NETmundial outcomes
>> >
>> > . Recognize that there have been some challenges in bringing this
>> group together and many concerns as to the processes by which this occurred
>> >
>> >
>> > . Convey broader civil society concerns that the convening
>> process was inconsistent with the NETmundial principles - greater openness
>> and transparency is required in order to achieve any legitimacy
>> >
>> >
>> > . Insist that the process going forward be true to principles of
>> openness, transparency and inclusivity and that there be mechanisms to
>> ensure that fullest participation is facilitated
>> >
>> >
>> > . Insist that the NMI support, underpin and strengthen the IGF
>> and its work
>> >
>> > . Insist that the NMI not duplicate or subsume work of existing
>> entities to promote NETmundial outcomes but rather support and encourage
>> such work and find new avenues
>> >
>> >
>> > . Seek clarification and work to identify the medium to long term
>> goals of NMI - what is the NMI's added value, specific purpose and what are
>> (at most) the three clearly identifiable and achievable goals that it is
>> going to set for itself
>> >
>> >
>> > . Work to ensure that NMI is not operating in a vacuum and that
>> it is appropriately linked to 1NET, the IGF, the various business and civil
>> society platforms, etc., and to ensure that it is appropriately taking into
>> account other processes such as the WSIS+10 review
>> >
>> >
>> > . Suggest that a meeting in January around the fringes of Davos
>> may not be suitably accessible to the majority of interested parties given
>> the costs, etc., of that particular event
>> >
>> >
>> > . Seek to put "more meat on the bones" of the proposed actions,
>> noting where such actions are already taking place (and their progress),
>> and suggest that it may be wise to start with one action rather than
>> multiple [encouraging the implementation of NETmundial outcomes -
>> particularly governance principles and processes - at the national and
>> regional levels, for example]
>> >
>> >
>> > . Suggest an open brainstorming session at Aug meeting and an
>> online process to solicit ideas for taking the NETmundial outcomes forward.
>> (Perhaps the Initiative should be open to suggestions as to possible
>> actions on an ongoing basis.)
>> >
>> >
>> > . Better understand the role of the WEF and how the "host" is
>> going to rotate and how the meetings will be structured so that they can
>> encourage the greatest possible engagement and participation
>> >
>> >
>> > . Ensure that the steering committee going forward is put
>> together through appropriately transparent and inclusive processes.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > From: Brett Solomon <brett at accessnow.org>
>> > Date: Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 2:41 PM
>> > Subject: [bestbits] NetMundial Initiative
>> > To: "<,bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>," <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>
>> >
>> > Hey there,
>> >
>> > As many of you know there is a post-Sao Paolo process emerging,
>> proposed by Fadi Chehadi at ICANN, called the Net Mundial Initiative.
>> Various versions of the documents laying out this concept have been
>> floating around and are now leaked.
>> >
>> > A number of individuals including myself were alerted to this process
>> before the documents were 'leaked' and have since communicated it more
>> broadly amongst civil society. Clearly there are a number of procedural and
>> substantive questions about what the Net Mundial Initiative will seek to
>> accomplish, who will be involved, and what the processes for inclusion and
>> decision-making will be moving forward.
>> >
>> > As the documents indicate, the next step of the Net Mundial Initiative
>> will be a meeting in Geneva on August 28th. A number of members of civil
>> society who have been invited to join the Net Mundial Initiative will
>> attend this event, including Carolina Rossini (Public Knowledge), Eileen
>> Donahoe (HRW), and Bill Drake (though perhaps more there as a
>> representative of the academic community).
>> >
>> > I have not communicated this yet to the organizers, but I'm planning
>> on going to the event to learn more, but Access has not decided yet whether
>> we will accept the invitation to join the Steering Committee. Regardless, I
>> personally will consult our global membership and other civil society
>> partners to garner an array of perspectives before attending.
>> >
>> > From what I have been told, the process will be hosted by the World
>> Economic Forum for a temporary period from August to February 2015. In
>> addition to those listed above, a number of concerns have been raised about
>> the Initiative including:
>> >
>> > . Participation: selection process, attendance, and
>> representation from the global south
>> > . WEF as host: corporate nature of the host, perceptions of
>> corporate capture, approach to development and elitism
>> > . Objectives: what is the NMI trying to achieve, and how does it
>> relate to other key elements of the IG landscape, in particular the IGF.
>> >
>> > All of the people that Fadi and WEF reached out to that I've talked to
>> have expressed pretty deep concerns back to the organizers, including
>> pushing hard to make sure civil society is represented and for this process
>> in general to be more open, transparent, and inclusive of those from the
>> global south. It would be good if we could have as open lines of
>> communication as possible, including at the event, so if people have any
>> thoughts or concerns they can then share them on or off list. Those who are
>> attending should be a conduit for communication.
>> >
>> > Additionally, we have requested a meeting between civil society
>> representatives and Fadi and Klaus (of WEF), so there will be a further
>> opportunity to voice concerns there, which those going to Geneva will
>> report back on.
>> >
>> > Best wishes
>> >
>> > Brett
>> >
>> > PS I am on Access team offsite so might be slow to respond.
>> >
>> > Brett Solomon
>> > Executive Director
>> > Access | accessnow.org
>> >
>> > +1 917 969 6077
>> > @solomonbrett
>> > Key ID: 0x4EDC17EB
>> > Fingerprint: C02C A886 B0FC 3A25 FF9F ECE8 FCDF BA23 4EDC 17EB
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > --
>> > Carolina Rossini
>> > Vice President, International Policy
>> > Public Knowledge
>> > http://www.publicknowledge.org/
>> > + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > 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:
>> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> https://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/mailman/listinfo/irp
>
>
--
---
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/mailman/private/irp/attachments/20140825/fccbd8d7/attachment.html>
More information about the IRP
mailing list