UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET MUNDIAL INITIATIVE

[Edward Morris]

Great summary, Robin.

This isn't a black and white issue. From a philosophical standpoint I doubt 
many of us are comfortable with participation in an institution created by 
the nice folks who run the WEF. I also question what ICANN is doing pushing 
this project, one that goes far beyond ICANN's responsibility for  names and 
numbers. We all are aware of Fadi's love of all things Davos, but raising 
his profile there should not be done at the expense of maintaining ICANN's 
limited remit.

That said, if it is going to happen anyway it's probably best to be involved 
(while, conversely, opposing ICANN's role in creating the NMI) provided CS 
is allowed to select its own representatives. In no way should we 
participate if the NMI secretariat is involved in the selection of specific 
stakeholders. Bottom up is something the WEF will have trouble with. If they 
can cut against their elitist instincts and accept a more egalitarian 
selection process for CS reps that we can accept then I'd be inclined to 
participate. It would be a good chance to push our agenda to elites who may, 
in fact, be receptive to our ideas but are only now involved in IG due to 
the nature of those who are organising the forum. 

Ed



-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Gross <robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG>
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 10:15:29 -0800
Subject: Re: UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET MUNDIAL INITIATIVE

Folks,

Should NCSG participate in the NetMundial Initiative?   We are still waiting 
for confirmation from its secretariat as to whether or not civil society 
will be allowed to select all of its own representatives to the 
"coordination council" or if the secretariat will reserve the right to 
select some of civil society's representatives for us.  (The NMI secretariat 
have civil society orgs in mind who will be bring publicity and good PR to 
their project, but don't actually engage on these issues).

In my mind this is a critical question, and since the secretariat has been 
unwilling to confirm this yet, I remain skeptical of the initiative and our 
"legitimization" of it; however if the response from the secretariat is that 
they will play a "hands off" role in terms of civil society representatives, 
I'll be happy to change my mind.  

It is important that this initiative, in practice, live up the Netmundial 
principles (including stakeholders select their own representatives).  If 
the NMI organizers cannot confirm that much, then it is just an 
appropriation of the NetMundial label without the principles that we worked 
very hard in Sao Paulo to achieve.

At this point, while we wait for clarification from NMI's secretariat, each 
of the groups in the CSCG are asked to consider if they believe they should 
participate in the initiative.  So I ask this of NCSG.  JustNet Coalition 
has already decided against it.  Importantly, ISOC has said it will not 
participate in the initiative or its coordination council because it lacks 
openness, bottom-up orientation, accountability, and transparency in its 
structure and operations.  

We've heard that Fadi is touting CSCG's letter to the secretariat asking to 
select the civil society representatives as evidence of civil society's 
support for his initiative and as "legitimizing" the NMI.  What Fadi doesn't 
understand yet, however, is that our sending the letter requesting to be 
involved is not what "legitimizes" NMI.  It is whether NMI actually "walks 
the talk" and permits civil society to, in fact, make our own determinations 
for who should represent us - and in practice - not just words - live up the 
NetMundial principles of bottom-up governance, openness, transparency, 
accountability, etc.

A few Pro & Con arguments below.  Please send your thoughts.  I'll update as 
soon as we have some news one way or the other from the NMI secretariat.

Thanks,
Robin


FOR INVOLVEMENT

With ITU a governments only forum and no real will to change, and IGF as a 
forum with no power to make recommendations or take decisions and again no 
will to change, there is no credible venue to initiate action on non 
technical issues or issues not within the remit of Istar organisations These 
would include surveillance issues, human rights issues, net neutrality 
issues, to name a few.

The solid commitment to NetMundial principles promised, if carried out in 
practice, would create a credible and open initiative

There is a need for a representative forum capable of moving us forward on a 
range of issues not covered by existing institutions

Participation is strongly supported by some sections of civil society



AGAINST INVOLVEMENT

The last thing we need is a corporate takeover of internet governance and 
this could become that

ISOC has withdrawn

Participation is strongly opposed by some sections of civil society

This initiative has a track record of poor communication

Not bottom-up or transparent so far



On Nov 17, 2014, at 3:22 PM, Robin Gross wrote:

Statement from the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) from today.   
CSCG is comprised of the Internet Governance civil society networks of NCSG, 
APC, Best Bits, JustNet, Diplo Foundation, Internet Governance Caucus, and 
Civicus.  - Robin

UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET MUNDIAL INITIATIVE.
 
Please note that Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) 
participation in the new Net Mundial initiative is still under 
consideration. CSCG has written to the NMI Secretariat and Transitional 
Council suggesting that it play a co-ordinating role in the selection of 
civil society representatives in a coordinated bottom up manner, rather than 
these decisions being made by the Transitional Council (which has no civil 
society representation). This is still under discussion; however, we do not 
yet have a proposal with sufficient clarity for member coalitions to be able 
to decide on participation or not. While Just Net Coalition (JNC) has 
already determined it will not participate, other members are waiting for 
clarity on our proposal for a bottom up and inclusive procedure for 
determining civil society representatives before making any final decisions 
on participation.
 
Our letter to  the NMI Secretariat and Transitional Council in no way 
signifies that any or all CS organisations have made a final decision on 
whether to engage with the NMI in a formal selection process or to 
participate in the NMI process.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141118/e17dfa40/attachment.htm>