[discuss] surveillance governance, was Re: [governance] NTIA statement
parminder at itforchange.net
Sat Mar 22 08:37:07 UTC 2014
On Tuesday 18 March 2014 03:28 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> To find out what the missing link is and where we have a gap (or a malfunction) we need first of all something like a Multistakeholder Internet Governance Clearing House (I have called this MIPOG / Multistakeholder Internet Policy Group). If a stakeholder, including a national government, has a problem, it could go to MIPOG with a request and MIPOG would recommend how to move forward by delegating the request to an existing mechanism or by launching a (multistakeholder) process in a bottom up, inclusive, open and transparent way to develop policies (as an RFC) which could, if needed, also include the launch of new multistakeholder mechanisms.
This is even more problematic part of your proposal...
I am sure that with your long political and political economy training
you realise that you are proposing to put big business into a position
of deciding and vetoing what issues could or could not be taken up for
public policies related consideration, and that how dangerous and
fundamentally undemocratic such a proposal is...
I would also like to ask you, why did you not recommend such a
(euphemistically called) multistakeholder - but basically, big business
dominated - pre-screening of all issues that could be taken for public
policy consideration to the CoE, when you were asked to give a report on
cross border Internet issues?
Or nor suggest it to OCED's Internet policy organ CCICP?
Would be much easier to get this accomplished there, isnt it, with all
these countries chanting the multistakeholder matra. Why dont you try it
over there first. And then it would be much easier to showcase such a
radically new (brave new) 'best practice' for the global stage. You, and
others who raise such proposals for the global stage, have not ever even
written a note to these bodies of rich nations about similar business,
sorry, multistakeholder, pre-screening of public policies. Are you
afraid that youd be solidly rebuffed, if not laughed at?
Or, why do you not promote such a practice in your country first, in
Germany? (And the people would immediately tell you what they think of
such subversion of democracy.)
Why are such advice and recommendations only reserved for venues where
poor developing countries seek their rightful part in global policy making?
More information about the discuss