ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[npoc-voice]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[npoc-voice] Fwd: [Internet Policy] Human Rights Council Internethumanrightsresolution

  • To: "npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx" <npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [npoc-voice] Fwd: [Internet Policy] Human Rights Council Internethumanrightsresolution
  • From: Olévié Kouami <olivierkouami@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:43:40 +0000

Hi all NPOCers !

I've found this thread on ISoc mailing list very interesting for our
constitutency and forwading it to you. I think that we are namely
called to act here;
What do you think at policy level ?
Let's start acting ...
Cheers !
-Olévié-

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 17:57:37 +0200
Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] Human Rights Council
Internethumanrightsresolution
To: Wolfgang Kleinwächter <wolfgang.kleinwaechter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: internetpolicy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You are welcome.

I have two suggestions.

1) NGOs should provide a proposed text to be included in the
resolution - there is still plenty of time in the next 10-days or so
to do so, and after all, even a paragraph would be an improvement

2) Those NGOs who are members of CONGO should speak up within it to
ask for CONGO to be more active. It has a Secretariat, after all.

3) Those NGOs from the Internet space who are going to the annual
meeting this September could speak up in fora like this one and ask
for contributions and thoughts and take them to the meeting.


On 1 Jul 2014, at 17:54, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Thanks Nick for making this more public.
>
> It is indeed a pity, than CONGO has lost its role it played during the WSIS 
> years. The whole CS mmechanism, which emerged in the WSIS process (CS 
> Plenary, CS Bureau, CS Content&Themes, CS WGs) collapsed after Tunis (the IGC 
> was the only body which survived and it risks now also to die). WSIS 10+ is 
> not such an incentive to rebuild it. One consequence is that WSIS 10+ is 
> driven now be a governmental agenda, controlled by UNGIS. There are no "CS or 
> PS bureaus" anymore which can talk on an equal level to UNGIS. This is a 
> "multistakeholder approach under governmental leadership" (and NY dominuates 
> now Geneva).
> An idea how to balance this? Could NetMundial offer an alternative in the 
> mid-term?
>
> Wolfgang
> .
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: InternetPolicy im Auftrag von Nick Ashton-Hart
> Gesendet: Mo 30.06.2014 22:44
> An: Jeremy Malcolm; internetpolicy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Betreff: Re: [Internet Policy] Human Rights Council 
> Internethumanrightsresolution
>
> Here is a perfect example of something not covered.
>
> Each year there is a conference of NGOs in consultative status with the UN,
> it takes place adjacent to the opening of the GA.  There is a declaration
> in draft form for this year, which has a great deal about virtually every
> important CS issue - but for technology and the Internet nothing but a
> placeholder.
>
> It is open for amendments now. See here:
> http://outreach.un.org/ngorelations/conference-2014/conference-2014-about-2/zero-draft/
>
>
> On 30 June 2014 18:49:26 Jeremy Malcolm <Jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 30/06/2014 2:27 am, michael gurstein wrote:
>>>
>>> Surely the appropriate initiative is not to urge under-resourced folks
>>> to attempt the impossible of finding ways of intervening in multiple
>>> and ever-increasing venues but rather to work towards coherent
>>> instititutions/mechanisms that allow for effective and useful
>>> interventions in the areas of public interest/concern.
>>>
>>
>> I have not been agreeing with Michael on much lately but on this I
>> agree.  I have just been working on a visual map of all of the global
>> institutions that cover IP issues, and I came up with 19 of them.  The
>> only way that civil society (and some other stakeholders, including
>> smaller governments) can adequately cover these or even a small subset
>> of them.
>>
>> The best option is instead for a single institution (and for most of the
>> last decade I've been saying it should be the IGF) that would have the
>> ability to act as a clearinghouse and make multi-stakeholder
>> recommendations on policy issues that other institutions are dealing
>> with.  Diplo Foundation has recently likened this to coordination
>> function to an "Internet governance restaurant"
>> (http://www.diplomacy.edu/node/8069).
>>
>> --
>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O -
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------
>> _______________________________________________
>> To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
>> please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
>> https://portal.isoc.org/
>> Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
>




-- 
Olévié Ayaovi Agbenyo KOUAMI
DG Ets GIDA-OKTETS
CEO de INTIC4DEV (http://www.intic4dev.org)
SG de ESTETIC  (http://www.estetic.tg)
Membre de ISoc (www.isoc.org <http://www.isog.org/>) & du FOSSFA (
www.fossfa.net)
Membre de l'ICANN-NCSG/NPOC (http://www.icann.org/ et http://www.npoc.org/)
BP : 851 - Tél.: (228) 90 98 86 50 / (228) 98 43 27 72
Skype : olevie1 FB : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé - Togo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy