Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 16 Nov 2014 08:58:39 -0500 |
Content-Type: | multipart/alternative |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
The quote below (emphasis added) is from an article headlined "Trapped
in the Web" appearing in the November 15^th issue of the Indian express
and written by Arun Mohan Sukumar, senior fellow, Centre for
Communication Governance, National Law University, Delhi.
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/trapped-in-the-web/
The article is about India's "Document 98" proposal at the ITU meetings
earlier this month. Given the unfortunately almost automatic reaction
against India's proposals around Internet governance, it is worth paying
closer attention to India's proposals around the governance discussion
process itself. Sukumar writes:
/It is imperative that the three nodal entities responsible for the
articulation of internet policies - the ministry of external affairs,
the Department of Telecom and the Department of Electronics and
Information Technology - evolve a policy framework for discussions. It
should outline at least four important concerns: *the selection criteria
for civil society interlocutors; *the terms of reference of
consultation;*the role of non-governmental representatives in official
Indian delegations abroad*, if any; and finally, the publication of
minutes of consultations. The Brazilian Internet Steering Committee,
which has been meeting for two decades, could offer a good parallel, at
least in terms of structure./
The issues of selection criteria and roles are a non-commercial
stakeholder civil society concerns that will manifest themselves across
governments. This might be an opportunity to open up and reflect on how,
and according to what core values, civil society is now, and should be
represented in the processes of the articulation of internet policies.
At the level of civil society/government relations probably the least
good strategy is to simply assert that the Internet needs to stay "free
and open" without a dialogue around the practical meaning of those
terms, a dialogue that includes governments as significant stakeholders.
The need for a policy framework for these specific discussions goes far
beyond India.
Sam L. (NPOC Policy Committee Chair)
|
|
|