[discuss] governments and rule of law (was: Possible approaches to solving...)

David Cake dave at difference.com.au
Tue Feb 25 16:01:42 UTC 2014

On 24 Feb 2014, at 8:50 pm, Jefsey <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:

> At 12:59 24/02/2014, Steve Crocker wrote:
>> John, et al,
>> There is work underway to bring the GAC earlier into the policy development process so their input is available during and not just after the PDP concludes.
> What is surprising is that the BoD, during its september meeting, when it planned its /1net strategy, did not planned a way to involve the GAC in the Sao Paulo preparation.

	It isn't surprising to me - the Brazilian government, rather than the ICANN, is handling govt involvement in Sao Paulo preparation, and are handling govt participation. 

	It IS, however, unfortunate. 
	Once again, I say that govt policy positions are not unified, though many of our international governance models presume they are. And the Brazilian govt is not necessarily inviting the same govt representatives to Sao Paulo as would be invited to the GAC. I know this to be true for Australia (normally our GAC reps are from from the Dept of Communications, but the Foreign Affairs and Trade dept is supplying our reps for the Sao Paulo meeting). Their positions may well differ - and their experience with multi-stakeholder processes certainly will. 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140226/f86ed476/signature-0001.asc>

More information about the discuss mailing list