++++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