Re: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [Governance] Request for support -- del etion of words from the CS document

[Meryem Marzouki <marzouki@ras.eu.org>]

[Following Sally's request, I've removed the plenary list from the list  
of recipients]

Hi Sasha and all

The new sentence you propose means that the CS document supports ICANN  
process as it is, i.e. the statu quo. The problem is that the point of  
disagreement between us is not on ITU replacing ICANN (everbody is  
against that) but on ICANN itself.
If we demand full inclusion of CS in ICANN, ICANN will say "of course  
we agree", and the situation will remain the same: ICANN has no problem  
with CS inclusion, provided that CS has no power and connot do  
anything, as perfectly well explained by Vittorio.

I understand we need to explicitely state that CS demand is NOT that  
ITU replaces ICANN. Let's do it, then !

A proposal, that should be discussed during Governance working group  
meeting tomorrow, could be:

"To these ends, the current management of Internet names and numbers  
and other related mechanisms should be re-examined with the full  
participation of all stakeholders in light of serving public interests  
and compatibility with human rights standards.

Since no existing organization or agency presents the adequate profile  
to fully meet these objectives, we call for an international conference  
to be held under the UN auspices between the two steps of the WSIS.  
This conference would gather all the WSIS participants in order to  
examine various proposed alternatives with respect to the objectives  
stated above".

This would have the advantage of neither supporting the statu quo, nor  
opening the door to any call for ITU replacing ICANN. It would simply  
open the debate on a larger scale.

Meryem Marzouki

Le lundi, 14 juil 2003, à 17:34 Europe/Paris, Sasha Costanza-Chock a  
écrit :

> If the problem is that our statement here could be interpreted as  
> support
> for a shift in internet governance power from ICANN to ITU, IMHO that  
> stems
> from a 'soft' wording of what should basically be a demand for  
> inclusion in
> ICT governance mechanisms, however they develop, current or in the  
> future.
> As the Civil Society Plenary, although not representative, we should be
> taking stands on behalf of the non-state, non-corporate, public  
> interest,
> not on behalf of "all 'stakeholders'".
>
> What if we remove the potentially dangerous 're-examined with the full
> participation of all stakeholders;' make clear that we are calling for
> inclusion regardless the forum - couldn't we all agree on a position  
> along
> the lines of:
>
> "To these ends, we demand full inclusion of civil society in the  
> management
> of Internet names and numbers and any other related mechanisms, in  
> light of
> serving the public interest and in compatibility with human rights
> standards."
>
> This would be impossible to interpret as support for ITU unless there  
> was
> serious reform of ITU's nature, and if it's a given that power for the
> forseeable future will remain with ICANN, it becomes a clear call for
> greater participation there.
>
> sasha costanza-chock
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erick Iriarte Ahon
> To: plenary@wsis-cs.org; AdamPeake; governance@lists.cpsr.org;
> plenary@wsis-cs.org
> Sent: 7/14/2003 10:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [Governance] Request for support --
> deletion of words from the CS document
>
> I support this position.
>
> Erick Iriarte Ahon
> Alfa-Redi
> http://www.alfa-redi.org
>
>
> At 12:04 p.m. 14/07/2003 +0200, Wolfgang Kleinwächter wrote:
>> I support Adams position
>>
>> wolfgang
>>
>> Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp> schrieb am 14.07.03 11:44:04:
>>>
>>> To all members of the Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) mailing list.
>>>
>>> I would like to ask members of this list to support my request that
>>> the following paragraph be deleted from the Civil Society Priorities
>>> Document:
>>>
>>> "To these ends, the current management of Internet names and numbers
>>> and other related mechanisms should be re-examined with the full
>>> participation of all stakeholders in light of serving public
>>> interests and compatibility with human rights standards."
>>>
>>> Any call for re-examination will be seen as civil society
> undermining
>>> ICANN.  And if we do that we can only strengthen the position of the
>>> ITU and some governments in trying to gain control over Internet
>>> naming and addressing.
>>>
>>> The WSIS is not a debating society. We have no right to negotiate,
> we
>>> have no right of reply.  And we know how the government discussion
>>> will be, we have seen words twisted before, they will not read
> beyond
>>> " re-examined".
>>>
>>> Please support deletion of this paragraph.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Adam
>>> --
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Governance mailing list
>>> Governance@lists.cpsr.org
>>> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________ 
>> _
> _____
>> Jetzt bei WEB.DE FreeMail anmelden = 1qm Regenwald schuetzen! Helfen
>> Sie mit! Nutzen Sie den Serien-Testsieger.  
>> http://user.web.de/Regenwald
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Plenary mailing list
>> Plenary@wsis-cs.org
>> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary@wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary@wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>