++++1

On 11 December 2015 at 13:25, Matthew Shears <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> + 1
>
> On 10/12/2015 16:07, Milan, Stefania wrote:
>
>> Dear all
>>
>> first of all thanks to Niels for raising the issue. We clearly cannot
>> ignore this problem, while we travel there for an event which will
>> definitely be used by the local authorities as a source of international
>> legitimation and to show off in a variety of ways.
>>
>> But I agree with Sam: we have to think carefully about available options
>> and their consequences. Not only is there the problem of mission creep when
>> we mobilise ICANN as a space; there is also the risk, as Sam rightly said,
>> that people expect more from us than we can actually provide.
>>
>> Like many of you, I remember the WSIS in Tunis. I was reporting from the
>> protests outside the summit. I interviewed and gave voice, eccetera but the
>> reflection I made back then was that ... well, we "internationals" raised
>> quite some outcry but .. then we left. And some people on the ground had to
>> bear the consequences of their connection with us. Although with the best
>> intentions, we ultimately did not contribute much, and probably even made
>> things more difficult.
>>
>> Networking and taking the chance to meet, talk to and organise
>> international support at the margins of ICANN would probably be more
>> useful. As NCUC we have established the "tradition" of meeting "the civil
>> society" the Saturday before the meeting starts, and we use that time to
>> introduce ICANN to the local and recruit members. We can, e.g., organise
>> such an event, but instead spend the time to listen to the "locals". I
>> would also be happy to see the NCSG, or NCUC if it is easier, to take
>> stance here. A statement, well sourced and coordinated with our members who
>> are from the region, could be at least the starting point for a dialogue.
>>
>> My two cents, Stefi
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> Da: NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]> per conto di Stephanie
>> Perrin <[log in to unmask]>
>> Inviato: mercoledì 9 dicembre 2015 23.23
>> A: [log in to unmask]
>> Oggetto: Re: Marrakesh & 7 human rights defenders
>>
>> I support your position Sam.  I am as disgusted as anybody about what is
>> going on in Morocco re free speech, but a protest within our agenda does
>> not really fit in the mandate of ICANN, and inflaming the high level
>> meeting of Ministers which will be going on simultaneously is IMHO not a
>> great idea tactically, and embarrassing the Moroccan government is a
>> certainty given the profile of that event.  Having a parallel event,
>> such as Akdeniz et al did in Turkey beside the IGF last year might be a
>> better solution.  We do not want to undo the good work of getting human
>> rights wording into the bylaws.
>> Stephanie Perrin
>>
>> On 2015-12-09 15:11, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
>>
>>> NCSG Colleagues,
>>>
>>> I would like to caution a rush to decision here. But first I want to
>>> put my credentials on the table so there is no questioning of
>>> motives.  I have been engaged in civil rights struggles since the
>>> 1950's and 1960's where (in Berkeley) I, and my car, were shot at
>>> (tear gas grenades). For the past quarter century I have worked with
>>> the Ambedkar Centre for Justice and Peace in Mumbai (ACJP is a human
>>> rights, atrocity prevention and amelioration ngo dealing with
>>> Dalit/untouchable human rights and abuse).
>>>
>>> Niels has put a proposal on the table and one cannot but agree with
>>> the concerns around human rights and freedom of expression, while at
>>> the same time having major reservations about the proposed activities.
>>> I will state my personal objections here, and suggest an alternative.
>>>
>>> Since there is time between now and Marrakesh, after consultation, I
>>> will come back later with a position based on what the NPOC membership
>>> has to say about the proposed activities.
>>>
>>> First, it is important to remember that there is a vast difference
>>> between asking ICANN to be introspective, accountable and transparent
>>> about the relationship between activities within its remit and human
>>> rights. That has been the central focus of human rights discussions
>>> within ICANN up to now. The proposal to address Moroccan human rights
>>> issues within ICANN sessions is a quite different activity and
>>> essentially proposes that elements of the ICANN constituencies engage
>>> in broad human rights advocacy within ICANN. Also, look at the Human
>>> Rights Watch reports on ICANN's African GAC members. One could ask,
>>> why stop at Morocco? Africa produces an almost endless list of human
>>> rights abuses, mainly based on curbing freedom of expression. There is
>>> a better way.
>>>
>>> It would make more sense for individuals within ICANN constituencies,
>>> Niels' Article Nineteen, and local Moroccan human rights advocates to
>>> arrange concurrent events outside ICANN, using the opportunity of
>>> people attending ICANN in Marrakesh to engage in those events. This is
>>> superior to pressing for events within ICANN for two key reasons.
>>>
>>> The first is that engaging within the ICANN program in national human
>>> rights issues outside ICANN's remit is dangerous scope creep for
>>> ICANN. ICANN can advocate for the stability and security of the DNS,
>>> and it can be concerned about the relationship between the stability
>>> and security of the DNS as that relates to human rights, but it should
>>> stop there, at the border of its remit. Engaging in advocacy within
>>> ICANN would of course anger Morocco, and such anger and concern would
>>> go viral across GAC members and drive an even bigger (toxic) wedge
>>> between GAC and the NCSG constituencies, both within ICANN and at home.
>>>
>>> The second reason is that trying to fit Moroccan human rights issues
>>> into the already overly tight and compressed ICANN meeting agenda
>>> would be a disservice to Moroccans engaged in human rights advocacy.
>>> There is a real risk that Moroccan colleagues would expect more than
>>> could be delivered within ICANN meeting constraints. Even follow up
>>> press coverage would be highly constrained and risk coloring ICANN
>>> with an advocacy ting that would serve nobody.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, a concurrent event, organized in cooperation with
>>> but mainly by Moroccans and with extensive participation by those
>>> attending the ICANN meetings, would have more substance and more scope
>>> for follow up press coverage. ICANN people could attend the Moroccan
>>> event as individuals, or with the formal blessing of their own
>>> constituency organizations, outside of ICANN.
>>>
>>> Let us try to do this one right. A good idea badly executed is a
>>> lose-lose for all.
>>>
>>> Sam L.
>>>
>> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
>> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
>> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution,
>> forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this
>> information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is
>> prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received
>> this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the
>> material from any computer.
>>
>
> --
>
> Matthew Shears
> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
> Center for Democracy & Technology
> [log in to unmask]
> + 44 771 247 2987
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>



-- 
Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
Coordinator
The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
MDI Road Kanifing South
P. O. Box 421 Banjul
The Gambia, West Africa
Tel: (220) 4370240
Fax:(220) 4390793
Cell:(220) 9912508
Skype: pons_utd






*www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm>http://jokkolabs.net/en/
<http://jokkolabs.net/en/>www.waigf.org <http://www.waigf.org>www.itag.gm
<http://www.itag.gm>www.npoc.org
<http://www.npoc.org>http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753
<http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753>*www.diplointernetgovernance.org