At 10:29 PM +0300 8/7/09, Alex Gakuru wrote:
>To illustrate further, I have confidentially obtained the attached
>'East Africa Internet Governance Forum (EAIGF)' document.
Sorry for the slow reply.
The programme's now online, but an announcement
of the meeting's been online since the start of
the month
<http://www.eaigf.or.ke/component/content/article/1-latest-news/56-2009eaugf.html>.
Information about the EA-IGF
<http://www.eaigf.or.ke/component/content/article/1-latest-news/56-2009eaugf.html>,
and workshop for parliamentarians
<http://www.eaigf.or.ke/component/content/article/1-latest-news/63-eaigf4parl.html>
For those on the list who don't know about the
East Africa IGF, it's a regional IGF process.
Started last year involving Kenya, Tanzania,
Uganda and Rwanda, this year Burundi's joined.
Idea is for each country to hold a series of
online discussions to identify Internet policy
issues and needs important to them, these
discussions are then followed by a national
face-to-face meeting, and the national processes
feed into the regional meeting. Kenya's online
discussions were held over a 10 day period in
May, report of the discussions linked from here
<http://www.eaigf.or.ke/nigfs/kigf.html>
Discussions were held on a list run by Kenya ICT
Action Network (KICTANet), a multistakeholder
organization that's become influential in
communications issues.
I've been involved trying to make some
international connections and the like. Funding
is difficult (often is with anything IGF
unfortunately) and causes delays.
>Our consumer
>association is excluded from this "transparent" Internet Governance
>engagement. I suppose "inactive" participation criteria would help
>them locally...or could they be preparing/creating "inactive
>participants" pre-exclusion grounds at ICANN Board meeting in Nairobi
>next year?
>
>I attended last year's IGF where I raised pertinent consumer issues. A
>highly official cautioned me against saying "such bad things when we
>had important [IGF] visitors around" -- proves we are considered as
>"party spoilers"?
>
>Perhaps Adam Peake could shed some more light? - since is listed as a
>facilitator at "Parliamentarian IG luncheon and workshop" session. We
>suffer terribly opaque and unaccountable leadership at this corner of
>the world.
I've been amazed at the openness of the
discussion on the KICTANet list. The Permanent
Secretary of the ministry of Information and
Communication is a regular contributor, as are
members of communications commission, users,
technical community, civil society, donor
community and CEOs of some of the key ICT
players. And they seem happy to discuss just
about anything.
Best,
Adam
>Which I hope Adam assists Kenya change, lighten-up and
>inculcate/strengthen "bottom-up" approach and engagements at IGF and
>ICANN for all local internet stakeholders benefit.
>
>Otherwise, I would be inclined to conclude that the "new" top-down
>approach is now spreading fast around the world.
>
>Below message was posted today to a local mailing list run by persons
>close to Adam.
>
>But following this story
>http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Company%20Industry/-/539550/618420/-/u9jiulz/-/index.html,
>our local .ke registry management apparently resolved to cease all
>informational postings to our consumers mailing list.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Alex
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
>From: Vincent Ngundi <[log in to unmask]>
>
>Date: Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:45 AM
>
>Subject: [kictanet] Invitation to the 2009 Kenya Internet Governance
>Forum (Kenya IGF); 19th August 2009
>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <[log in to unmask]>
>
>RE: Invitation to the 2009 Kenya Internet Governance Forum (Kenya
>IGF): Advancing the Internet Governance Debate in Kenya: Thinking
>Globally; Acting Locally
>
>The Kenya Network Information Centre (KENIC), the Kenya ICT Action
>Network (KICTANet) and other participating organisations wish to
>invite you to the 2009 Kenya IGF to be held at the Jacaranda hotel in
>Nairobi, on the 19th of August 2009.
>
>The 2009 Kenya IGF is a follow up to the 2008 EAIGF review workshop
>and the 2009 Internet Governance national mailing list discussions.
>
>With the increased access to broadband infrastructure in Kenya and in
>the East Africa region and the continued spread of sophisticated
>mobile services, understanding and addressing Internet policy issues
>has become a priority. The Kenya IGF will help prepare Kenyan Internet
>stakeholders to address the opportunities, strength and challenges, as
>well as ensuring that they have a voice in shaping Internet policy
>decisions at the global level.
>
>The Kenya IGF will therefore provide an opportunity to increase
>awareness and understanding of Internet governance policy issues and
>the links with socio-economic, political and cultural development.
>
>The outcomes of the forum will be submitted to the 2009 East Africa
>Internet Governance Forum (EA-IGF) to be held in Nairobi from the 7th
>to the 9th of September 2009 and subsequently to the global Internet
>Governance Forum (IGF) meeting to be held in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt,
>in November 2009. The Kenya IGF will also contribute towards setting
>the stage for the 37th Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
>Numbers (ICANN) meeting to be held in Nairobi, Kenya, in March 2010.
>
>As a key player in the Internet industry, it is my pleasure to invite
>you to the 2009 Kenya IGF. A detailed programme for the event is
>attached.
>
>For planning purposes, please register for the meeting by sending an
>email to [log in to unmask] confirming your attendance.
>
>Kind Regards,
>
>-----------
>
>Vincent Ngundi
>
>Administrative Manager
>
>KENIC - The Kenya Network Information Centre
>
>http://www.kenic.or.ke
>
>[log in to unmask]
>
>[T] +254 20 4450057/8
>
>[C] +254 20 2398036
>
>[M] +254 733 790073
>
>[F] +254 20 4450087
>
>--ends--
>
>
>Alex
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Vincent Ngundi <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:45 AM
>Subject: [kictanet] Invitation to the 2009 Kenya Internet Governance
>Forum (Kenya IGF); 19th August 2009
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <[log in to unmask]>
>
>RE: Invitation to the 2009 Kenya Internet Governance Forum (Kenya
>IGF): Advancing the Internet Governance Debate in Kenya: Thinking
>Globally; Acting Locally
>The Kenya Network Information Centre (KENIC), the Kenya ICT Action
>Network (KICTANet) and other participating organisations wish to
>invite you to the 2009 Kenya IGF to be held at the Jacaranda hotel in
>Nairobi, on the 19th of August 2009.
>
>The 2009 Kenya IGF is a follow up to the 2008 EAIGF review workshop
>and the 2009 Internet Governance national mailing list discussions.
>
>With the increased access to broadband infrastructure in Kenya and in
>the East Africa region and the continued spread of sophisticated
>mobile services, understanding and addressing Internet policy issues
>has become a priority. The Kenya IGF will help prepare Kenyan Internet
>stakeholders to address the opportunities, strength and challenges, as
>well as ensuring that they have a voice in shaping Internet policy
>decisions at the global level.
>
>The Kenya IGF will therefore provide an opportunity to increase
>awareness and understanding of Internet governance policy issues and
>the links with socio-economic, political and cultural development.
>
>The outcomes of the forum will be submitted to the 2009 East Africa
>Internet Governance Forum (EA-IGF) to be held in Nairobi from the 7th
>to the 9th of September 2009 and subsequently to the global Internet
>Governance Forum (IGF) meeting to be held in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt,
>in November 2009. The Kenya IGF will also contribute towards setting
>the stage for the 37th Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
>Numbers (ICANN) meeting to be held in Nairobi, Kenya, in March 2010.
>
>As a key player in the Internet industry, it is my pleasure to invite
>you to the 2009 Kenya IGF. A detailed programme for the event is
>attached.
>
>For planning purposes, please register for the meeting by sending an
>email to [log in to unmask] confirming your attendance.
>Kind Regards,
>-----------
>Vincent Ngundi
>Administrative Manager
>KENIC - The Kenya Network Information Centre
>http://www.kenic.or.ke
>[log in to unmask]
>[T] +254 20 4450057/8
>[C] +254 20 2398036
>[M] +254 733 790073
>[F] +254 20 4450087
>--ends--
>We are
>
>
>Adam,
>
>Would you mind assisting me
>
>On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> >In Kenya, we have a rich history of government-business 'steakholders'
>> >denial that we even exist.. How are we meant to be financially endowed
>> >to pull clout like them telecoms-government affiliates?
>> >
>> >Should consumers be part ICANN's ever-praised politico-business class
>> >they apparently ever seeks for? Who is a consumer? The little guy
>>
>> Alex,
>> You have hit the nail on the head! From China
>>and Hong Kong, I too am familiar with this game
>>of "official" representation, where the
>>"representatives" are singled out by the
>>powerful precisely because they are the ones
>>who are careful and cozy to the ones in power
>>and unwilling to rock the boat.
>>
>> As for your letter, yes, please do it. I'll be
>>glad to help you polish it. Unfortunately, the
>>US government (at least the Congressional
>>Democrats) seem more interested in U.S.
>>stakeholders these days but it can't hurt to go
>>over their heads.
>>
>> --MM
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> without a voice in a corporate-government interests dominated world
>> internet network-both claiming to act in the "best interests of the
>> consumer" (or public interest)? At the core are vested interests that
>> want to make the Internet for big bigs and that's not right.
>>
>> Vint Cerf built and handed over a consumer-receptive ICANN - one whose
>> current leadership cannot help but rubbish the little guy's voice on
>> the internet? A "bottom-up" ICANN is all I knew and cared about.
>>
>> I am tempted to write an email from Nairobi to President Obama
>> complaining about NCUC mistreatment by ICANN. Would it be appropriate?
>> I need your advice. Would you like me to send my draft on-list for
>> the NCUC Editor to polish it up?
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Robin Gross<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > What is also troubling is that our existing
>>membership already includes many
>> > members from these categories. We have at least dozen consumer
>> > organizations - many members of the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue and
>> > several new African consumer groups, so they
>>are here. Many just don't have
>> > the budgets internally to make ICANN a priority - it is expensive to fly
>> > around the world every few months and pay for $20 club sandwiches at the
>> > Hilton.
>> > What ICANN is looking for are "consumer groups" who are in fact funded by
>> > business - and not true noncommercial
>>organizations, but this will take away
>> > a noncommercial council seat. Another chip away from noncommercial users
>> > rights.
>> > The comment about libraries - we have libraries too. We are proud that
>> > Egypt's Library of Alexandria is a new member of NCUC - one of the members
>> > that ICANN doesn't think deserves a vote for lack of "representation" and
>> > "diversity". The irony of this barely 10-yr old Internet organization
>> > telling the ancient Library of Alexandria it doesn't deserve a vote on
>> > Internet policy is beyond arrogance. It is
>>dangerous. ICANN staff would
>> > drive the Internet into the ground if that is what it took to control it.
>> > Robin
>> >
>> > On Aug 6, 2009, at 3:16 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>> >
>> > At 11:17 AM +0200 8/6/09, William Drake wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Adam,
>> > I'm fine with restating openness to dialogue etc as you suggest. Not that
>> > we haven't before.
>> > Would like to pick up on one specific bit:
>> > On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>> >
>> > The NCUC does not have membership (or significant membership) from
>> > international consumer organizations (noted
>>in many recent comments from the
>> > board and others as a missing constituent in all of ICANN), nor for the
>> > largest academic communities, libraries, R&D, etc.
>> >
>> > This may well be "noted" by the board and others but it is patently untrue
> > > http://ncuc.syr.edu/members.htm. Just more disinformation.
>> > (BTW I also noted some on the transcript of
>>the ALAC call, e.g. Nick saying
>> > that the NCUC proposal does not allow board approval of
>> > constituencies...facts don't matter if one
>>can't be bothered to learn them).
>> > Which is not to say that it wouldn't be great to have more groups with
>> > "consumer" in their title etc.
>> >
>> > Bill, I know the NCUC membership has been growing, both organizations and
>> > individuals. But I got the impression ICANN was hoping (expecting)
>> > participation from groups representing new
>>non-commercial players, and also
>> > larger national and international
>>representative organizations. I think the
>> > commercial side of the user house was expecting this too, at least that's
>> > how I read some of the emails.
>> > Example in the library space, ALA has been a member for many years, but
>> > there are hundreds of similar organizations around the world, and then
>> > there's IFLA <http://www.ifla.org/>
>> > There's been a lot of talk about consumer
>>organizations: most countries have
>> > a national consumer organization, or many industry/sector related groups,
>> > and there are regional and international bodies (Consumers International,
>> > Jeremy Malcolm now works for). These
>>organizations are being encouraged to
>> > form a constituency in their own right, but that shouldn't stop them
>> > transitioning from the NCUC, or NCUC trying to help that constituency to
>> > form.
>> > Each year the board selects a member of the
>>NomCom to represent "Academia &
>> > Research" (you'd think an NCUC related group). They just selected a guy
>> > called Jan Gruntorád, CEO of CESNET, the Academic research network for the
>> > Czech Republic. Past selections have been people with similar backgrounds,
>> > large academic R&D networks (NRENs). Board obviously feels that it's a
>> > non-commercial community not represented in the NCUC (except for KAIST.)
>> > Very difficult to sell ICANN to these types
>>of organization, I don't see the
>> > board being able to do a good job of this without help, and the NCUC could
>> > do well by offering to help. It'll take outreach and money.
>> > About Nick's comment. Perhaps an example of people forgetting what was
>> > actually in the NCUC proposal because we've not been asked to discuss it,
>> > just concentrating on the SIC.
>> > Adam
>> >
>> > Perhaps this needs to be a larger, more focused discussion sometime, but
>> > while I think of it it's worth mentioning
>>that there is also a claim in said
>> > circles that our members are not all sufficiently active and hence our
>> > diversity is just on paper, which in turn is
>>supposed to allow for "capture"
>> > by a small cabal. This of course is held against us as well, and will be
>> > relevant in the NCSG. As you know, the staff's "Suggested Additional
>> > Stakeholder Group Charter Elements to Ensure Transparency, Openness,
>> > Fairness and Representativeness Principles" hold, inter alia, that "It is
>> > important that the Board and the community have the ability to determine
>> > what parties comprise a particular GNSO
>>structure and who participates in an
>> > active way....[hence] Each GNSO structure should collect, maintain, and
>> > publish active and inactive member names identified by membership category
>> > (if applicable)"
>> > I raised concerns about the reasoning and operational implications of this
>> > on the last GNSO call, but they were pretty much brushed aside.
>> > So I guess in some unknown manner members
>>will have to show sufficient signs
>> > of life on a frequent enough basis for staff to deem them active and
>> > consider their views to "count" when constituencies state positions. Oh,
>> > and meeting attendance lists must be published and will be considered too.
>> > At least, all this undoubtedly will apply to nomcomm constituencies,
>> > business ones may get the usual pass from
>>the standards to which we're held.
>> > And now I have to reply to the council list
>>about this claim in the SOI that
>> > we are "not yet sufficiently diverse or robust to select all six"...sigh.
> > > Pushing back on relentless disinfo does get tiring...
>> > Bill
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > IP JUSTICE
>> > Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> > 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
>> > p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
>> > w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>Content-Type: application/pdf; name="EA-IGF 2009 Tentative Program.pdf"
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
> filename="EA-IGF 2009 Tentative Program.pdf"
>X-Attachment-Id: f_fy3adkx00
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:EA-IGF 2009
>Tentativ#8163E3.pdf (PDF /«IC») (008163E3)
|
