ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[npoc-voice]


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

[npoc-voice] A Reflection on India's ITU Document 98

  • To: "NCSG-DISCUSS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <NCSG-DISCUSS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx" <npoc-voice@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [npoc-voice] A Reflection on India's ITU Document 98
  • From: Sam Lanfranco <lanfran@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 08:58:39 -0500

The quote below (emphasis added) is from an article headlined "Trapped in the Web" appearing in the November 15^th issue of the Indian express and written by Arun Mohan Sukumar, senior fellow, Centre for Communication Governance, National Law University, Delhi. http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/trapped-in-the-web/

The article is about India's "Document 98" proposal at the ITU meetings earlier this month. Given the unfortunately almost automatic reaction against India's proposals around Internet governance, it is worth paying closer attention to India's proposals around the governance discussion process itself. Sukumar writes:

/It is imperative that the three nodal entities responsible for the articulation of internet policies - the ministry of external affairs, the Department of Telecom and the Department of Electronics and Information Technology - evolve a policy framework for discussions. It should outline at least four important concerns: *the selection criteria for civil society interlocutors; *the terms of reference of consultation;*the role of non-governmental representatives in official Indian delegations abroad*, if any; and finally, the publication of minutes of consultations. The Brazilian Internet Steering Committee, which has been meeting for two decades, could offer a good parallel, at least in terms of structure./

The issues of selection criteria and roles are a non-commercial stakeholder civil society concerns that will manifest themselves across governments. This might be an opportunity to open up and reflect on how, and according to what core values, civil society is now, and should be represented in the processes of the articulation of internet policies. At the level of civil society/government relations probably the least good strategy is to simply assert that the Internet needs to stay "free and open" without a dialogue around the practical meaning of those terms, a dialogue that includes governments as significant stakeholders. The need for a policy framework for these specific discussions goes far beyond India.

Sam L. (NPOC Policy Committee Chair)



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy