<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Excellent statement<br><br>Sent from my iPhone<div><br></div><div><div><font><a href="http://www.twitter.com/arunmsukumar" target="_blank" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">@arunmsukumar</a></font></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Senior Fellow, <a href="http://www.ccgdelhi.org/">Centre for Communication Governance</a><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">National Law University, Delhi</span></div><div><font color="#000000"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><a href="http://amsukumar.tumblr.com/" target="_blank">http://amsukumar.tumblr.com</a> </span></font></div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Ph:<a href="tel:+91-9871943272" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="telephone" x-apple-data-detectors-result="1/2">+91-9871943272</a></span></div></div><div><br>On 21-Jun-2015, at 10:05 am, Carlos Afonso <<a href="mailto:ca@CAFONSO.CA">ca@CAFONSO.CA</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>* >>BRAZIL: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, AND GOOD MORNING TO EVERYONE. I'D</span><br><span>LIKE TO ALSO START BY THANKING THE TWO CO-CHAIRS OF THE GROUP AND TO</span><br><span>ACKNOWLEDGE THE TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK THAT WAS INVESTED IN</span><br><span>THE PREPARATION OF THE DRAFT PROPOSAL BEFORE US. WE THINK A LOT OF</span><br><span>WORK, EFFORT, AND REAL ATTEMPT TO RECONCILE SO MANY VIEWS WAS VESTED</span><br><span>IN THIS EXERCISE AND WE'D LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT.</span><br><span> * HOWEVER, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO, AS KAVOUSS ARASTEH HAS MENTIONED,</span><br><span>AND HE MADE A DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN HIS PARTICIPATION AND -- AS</span><br><span>REPRESENTATIVE OF IRAN -- AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE GAC, I WOULD ALSO LIKE</span><br><span>TO MAKE IN A SIMILAR FASHION KIND OF A DIFFERENTIATION OR CLARIFICATION</span><br><span>WITH REGARD TO OUR ROLE HERE AS REPRESENTATIVE TO THIS BODY AND THE</span><br><span>POSITION OF THE BRAZILIAN GOVERNMENT AS A WHOLE. *WE, OF COURSE,</span><br><span>COORDINATE INTERNALLY WITH DIFFERENT MINISTRIES AND INSTITUTIONS, AND</span><br><span>OF COURSE THE BEST EFFORT WE MAKE, WE HAVE, OF COURSE, ALWAYS TO MAKE</span><br><span>SURE IT IS ENDORSED BY THE WIDER GROUP. OTHERWISE, IT WOULD BE</span><br><span>MISLEADING TO SAY THAT BY SAYING YES HERE, WE ARE -- THE BRAZILIAN</span><br><span>GOVERNMENT IS SAYING YES. I THINK THIS IS THE WAY GOVERNMENTS</span><br><span>NORMALLY OPERATE.* AND I THINK MAYBE THIS WILL BE THE SAME WOULD</span><br><span>APPLY TO OTHER COLLEAGUES. BASICALLY WHAT I WANT TO SAY IS EVERYTHING</span><br><span>WE DO HERE (INDISCERNIBLE) REFERENDUM OF FINAL APPROVAL BY THE</span><br><span>GOVERNMENT AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FULL AREAS INVOLVED. THIS IS ON</span><br><span>THE ONE HAND.</span><br><span> * JUST TO MENTION IN REGARD TO THAT, *OUR MINISTER OF</span><br><span>COMMUNICATIONS IS COMING TO TOWN TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO BRIEF HIM ON</span><br><span>EVERYTHING THAT IS TAKING PLACE. HE IS ONE OF THE MINISTERS INVOLVED,</span><br><span>AND IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE CONVEY TO HIM EVERYTHING THAT WILL BE</span><br><span>SAID HERE.*</span><br><span> * IN REGARD TO THE PROPOSAL ITSELF, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A FEW REFLECTIONS</span><br><span>IN THE SENSE WE THINK IT ADDRESSES -- IT TAKES ON BOARD SOME CONCERNS</span><br><span>WE HAVE. ON THE OTHER HAND, SOME OTHER CONCERNS, IMPORTANT</span><br><span>CONCERNS WE HAVE ARE NOT DEALT WITH ADEQUATELY. WE HAVE INDICATED</span><br><span>THIS IN OUR COMMENTS WE SENT BOTH TO THE CWG STEWARDSHIP AND CCWG</span><br><span>ACCOUNTABILITY GROUPS.</span><br><span> * BASICALLY, AS THE GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL, WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS</span><br><span>EXERCISE AS ONE IN WHICH THE DEFINED OUTCOME WOULD ADDRESS THE NTIA</span><br><span>REQUIREMENTS. THE (INDISCERNIBLE) WE ARE FULLY IN AGREEMENT WITH THOSE.</span><br><span>WE THINK THIS ACTUALLY REFLECTS THE WAY WE HAVE BEEN OPERATING, AND WE</span><br><span>DON'T SEE THERE ANY CONSISTENCY WITH ANYTHING WE HAVE BEEN DOING, SO</span><br><span>WE ARE FULLY BEHIND THIS.</span><br><span> * AT THE OTHER SIDE, WE ARE ALSO ACCOUNTABLE, OF COURSE, TO OUR OWN</span><br><span>GOVERNMENTS AND TO SOME HISTORICAL DEMANDS WE HAVE IN REGARD TO</span><br><span>THIS PROCESS. FIRST OF ALL, WE STILL -- AND WE WILL TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY OF</span><br><span>THOSE DAYS WE HAVE HERE IN BUENOS AIRES TO GO THROUGH THE PROPOSAL</span><br><span>AND TO DISCUSS WITH THE CO-CHAIRS AND COLLEAGUES, BECAUSE WE WERE</span><br><span>VERY FIRMLY INTERESTED THAT AT THE END WE WOULD HAVE REALLY CLEAR</span><br><span>SEPARATION BETWEEN THE POLICY OPERATIONAL ASPECTS . *AT THIS POINT I</span><br><span>MUST SAY THE PROPOSAL AS IT STANDS DOESN'T SEEM TO BE -- SEEMS TO HAVE</span><br><span>SOME INCONSISTENCIES. ON THE ONE HAND WE SAY THERE IS A LEGAL</span><br><span>SEPARATION. ON THE OTHER HAND, WE SAY PTI SHOULD BE CONTROLLED BY</span><br><span>ICANN. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME MORE DISCUSSION AROUND THIS,</span><br><span>BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK THAT IN THE END, THE ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE WILL BE</span><br><span>REACHED.* AND I THINK MAYBE THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM ABOUT THIS IS</span><br><span>THAT FROM THE BEGINNING, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING -- *WE HAVE NOT BEEN</span><br><span>WORKING ON A CLEAN SLATE OR A BLANK SHEET, HAVING ALL THE OPTIONS</span><br><span>BEFORE US. EVERYTHING WE HAVE BEEN DOING IS TRYING TO ADJUST OUR</span><br><span>PROPOSALS, OUR MECHANISM TO EXISTING STATUS. SO ANYTHING THAT COMES</span><br><span>FORWARD AS A PROPOSAL SHOULD ADJUST ITSELF TO THE FACT THAT ICANN IS</span><br><span>INCORPORATED AS AN ENTITY UNDER THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATION, AND WE</span><br><span>THINK -- IT MIGHT BE OKAY, BUT IT REFLECTS A SITUATION THAT WAS</span><br><span>PREDETERMINED AS WE STARTED THIS EXERCISE, THAT WAS IMPOSED. IT WAS NOT</span><br><span>AGREED BY THE WHOLE COMMUNITY, AND BY GOVERNMENTS AS PART OF THAT</span><br><span>COMMUNITY.* SO WHAT WE ARE DOING IS TRYING TO ADJUST A NEW ERA TO THE</span><br><span>EXISTING FORMATS, WHICH -- AND WE ENDORSING THIS. SO FOR GOVERNMENTS,</span><br><span>I THINK IT'S A VERY HARD STEP TO TAKE. IT'S AN UNPRECEDENTED THING, MAYBE.</span><br><span> * USUALLY, AS A GOVERNMENT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM IN HAVING A</span><br><span>DECISION THAT WILL GO AGAINST OUR (INDISCERNIBLE) TO THE EXTENT THAT</span><br><span>WE'RE PART OF THE DESIGN OF THE PROCESS THAT WILL LEAD TO THIS</span><br><span>DECISION. SO WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE IS TO -- ON THE BASIS OF SOMETHING</span><br><span>THAT WAS ALREADY THERE AND WHICH WE DID NOT PARTICIPATE, TRYING TO</span><br><span>REFLECT ON HOW TO IMPROVE IT BUT MAINTAINING THE SAME</span><br><span>CHARACTERISTICS. SO WE THINK IT'S A VERY CHALLENGING THING FROM A</span><br><span>PERSPECTIVE OF GOVERNMENT. AND OF COURSE THIS IS NOT SOME THINGS -- A</span><br><span>DECISION WE SHOULD TAKE LIGHTLY.</span><br><span> * WE HAVE, IF I WOULDN'T LIKE TO MENTION, OUR OWN CRITERIA OR OUR</span><br><span>OWN RED LINES, BUT WE THINK IN THE END *SOME REFLECTIONS SHOULD BE</span><br><span>GIVEN TO THE ISSUE OF HOW ICANN WILL EMERGE FROM THIS WITH MORE</span><br><span>LEGITIMACY, VIS-A-VIS ALL STAKEHOLDERS INCLUDING GOVERNMENTS, AND WE</span><br><span>DON'T SEE EXACTLY HOW THIS IS BEING ADDRESSED BY THE PROPOSAL WE HAVE</span><br><span>AT HAND.* SO BASICALLY WHAT I'D LIKE JUST TO INDICATE FROM THE START IS</span><br><span>THAT WE HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN THIS EXERCISE IN THE -- WE THINK IN A</span><br><span>CONSTRUCTIVE MODE. MY COLLEAGUES HAVE BEEN THERE, AND FOLLOWING AND</span><br><span>MAKING INPUTS TO THOSE PROCESSES. BUT I THINK WE -- AND I THINK THIS IS</span><br><span>ALSO INCLUDED IN THE PRESENTATION OF THE CO-CHAIRS; THAT WE HAVE -- WE</span><br><span>MUST HAVE THE -- AN APPRAISAL OF THE FULL PICTURE THAT WILL EMERGE FROM</span><br><span>THIS, THE TWO PROPOSALS COMBINED, HOW THEY WILL LOOK, HOW THE</span><br><span>PARLANCE OF THAT PROPOSAL WILL PROVIDE US WITH THE CERTAINTY THAT WE</span><br><span>HAVE IMPROVED IN REGARD TO WHAT WE HAVE TODAY, AND IT IS NOT SO CLEAR</span><br><span>FOR US RIGHT NOW.</span><br><span> * AND BASICALLY, JUST TO CONCLUDE, TO SAY THAT *THIS EXERCISE INVOLVES</span><br><span>DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS WHICH HAVE DIFFERENT CULTURES IN REGARD TO</span><br><span>GOVERNMENTS, CLEARLY THE CULTURE AND THE WAY GOVERNMENTS ARE</span><br><span>COMFORTABLE IN WORKING IS NOT BEING FOLLOWED. WE WORK UNDER RULES.</span><br><span>WE HAVE NOT DESIGNS. I SEE IN MANY DOCUMENTS THAT WE MUST STICK TO THE</span><br><span>RULES AND REGULATIONS WE ARE FORCED TO ADOPT. THIS IS SOMETHING VERY</span><br><span>STRANGE TO DO. IT'S NOT SOMETHING USUAL, AND WE'LL HAVE TO REPORT BACK</span><br><span>TO OUR GOVERNMENT AND SAY WE HAVE BEEN THERE, WE HAVE AGREED TO THIS,</span><br><span>AND THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE. AND I'M REALLY CONCERNED THAT IF WE DON'T</span><br><span>MEET SOME OF THOSE VERY BASIC CONCERNS, IN THE END IT MIGHT BE</span><br><span>MISLEADING FOR US TO SAY HERE WE ARE GIVING FINAL APPROVAL FROM THE</span><br><span>PERSPECTIVE OF GOVERNMENTS. WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS EXERCISE FROM THE</span><br><span>BEGINNING AS ONE THAT WOULD PROVIDE A NEW PARADIGM OF COOPERATION</span><br><span>BETWEEN STAKEHOLDERS AND GOVERNMENTS INCLUDED, ONE IN WHICH ALL</span><br><span>STAKEHOLDERS COME TOGETHER AND HAVE FULL LIBERTY TO DISCUSS AMONG</span><br><span>THE STAKEHOLDERS HOW WE ARE GOING TO DESIGN A NEW FORMAT FOR</span><br><span>COOPERATION. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THIS DID NOT TAKE PLACE. WE HAVE BEEN</span><br><span>SAYING THIS FROM THE BEGINNING. I DON'T THINK THIS WILL COME AS A</span><br><span>SURPRISE TO YOU.* WE THINK THE -- *WE HAVE BEEN WORKING IN A</span><br><span>STRAITJACKET, AND IT BECOMES CLEARLY EVIDENT WHEN WE LOOK AT SOME VERY</span><br><span>CREATIVE IDEAS THAT CAME TO THE FORE AND THEY WERE DISMISSED BECAUSE</span><br><span>THEY DO NOT ADJUST TO THE FORM THAT WE -- AND THIS IS SOMETHING REALLY</span><br><span>UNCOMFORTABLE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF GOVERNMENTS.* MAYBE, IN THE</span><br><span>END, WE MAY COME TO AN AGREEMENT THAT IT ADDRESSES OR IT IS IN OUR BEST</span><br><span>INTEREST TO ENDORSE THE SITUATION BECAUSE IN THE FINAL BALANCE, IT WILL</span><br><span>BE IN A BETTER POSITION, BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE STILL NEED TO REFLECT.</span><br><span> * SO AGAIN, *WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO WORK CONSTRUCTIVELY WITH</span><br><span>YOU TO HAVE BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND ALL THE ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSAL;</span><br><span>HOWEVER, WE WILL LOOK AT SOMETHING MUCH MORE AMBITIOUS THAT WILL</span><br><span>PROVIDE REAL SEPARATION, REAL INDEPENDENT OVERVIEW. AND WE THINK AT</span><br><span>THIS POINT IT DOESN'T -- THE PROPOSAL*, AS IT STANDS, WILL NEED SOME MORE</span><br><span>DETAILS ON HOW THIS WOULD WORK. THANK YOU.</span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>