Dear All, The WTSA, which sets the work program for the Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) ended on 29th November, paving way for the WCIT. The Plenipotentiary Conference 2010 instructed the ITU Secretary General to organize the conference, to capture the tremendous changes and transformation that have taken place in the ICT sector. The last conference was held in Melbourne, Australia, in 1988. Consequently, the ITU Council set up a working group to spearhead the process. The ITU-T Director has been the one organizing the process since the bulk of the substantive issues of the conference are related to standardization. Certainly, the outcome of the conference will be a product of a negotiated settlement, based on a lot of give and take. The most controversial subjects revolve around the role of governments in the purview of the Internet. Transparency, security,international accounting and settlement, fair compensation, spam, numbering and freedom, among others, are some of the topics that will come under intense global scrutiny in the next two weeks. One school of thought advocates for the Internet to continue evolving on what is perceived to be an open, multi -stakeholder environment, while the other strongly feels that governments must have a role in the setting of rules governing the management of the resources that facilitate the evolution of the Internet, while allowing commercial entities, the freedom to freely negotiate. Network operators, buoyed by a number of national governments, are pushing for the recognition of not only the role they play in facilitating the delivery of content, but also for "fair" compensation for the use of their infrastructure in order to sustainably continue investing in the requisite facilities on which the net and its related services ride. Subjects such as fraud and internet security, which have become more and more complex will also be haggled upon vigorously. Content developers, advertisers, network operators, civili society, national governments, content sellers, bloggers, etc are pushing positions motivated by diverse persuasions. At the heart of the various divergent positions being put forward are deep-seated national, regional, and private strategic and economic interests. While some countries are clear on what they want, some may not be fully aware of the long-term consequences of the positions they may wish to take. Intense lobbying, innuendo, back-stabbing, misrepresentation, and pre-negotiations have been going on. Nevertheless, after the intense debates, the final product of WCIT will be a balance between and among the various positions. The ITU has come under intense pressure over the last few months and has been accused of habouring intentions of venturing into a domain it has no competence in and has been asked to focus on the arena of telecommunications. In its defence, the Union has insisted that, as a Member State based UN agency, it can only pursue an agenda put forward by its stakeholders and that it has no agenda of its own. The jury is still out but the truth will emerge once the veil is removed. The above notwithstanding, it's extremely important that we come to the conference with more than one strategies with the willingness for give and take, as long as we stay within the reasonable confines of our national interests. Countries are looking at the bigger longer-term picture based on regional and global interests. Countries pushing the freedom card must be aware that while the ethos of freedom are sacrosanct, there is no national edict that commands extra-territorial application and that a reasonable balance will have to be struck between and among many delicate interests. I can bet that even those countries that hold strong divergent positions have been engaging in prior negotiations to facilitate the spirit of consensus and compromise. It is within the foregoing context that we have to view the AfCPs; they constitute a position meant to facilitate positive engagement and compromise, bearing in mind the reality that no single position will, and can dictate the outcomes of the conference. These are negotiations folks, not a war of bravado and brinksmanship; it's not a contest between progress and anarchy. Remember, it has taken twenty four years to agree on a negotiation platform. Certainly, there has been winners and losers over this long period, and hence the need for a conference to streamline the operational and regulatory framework. There might be minimum changes, extensive changes, moderate changes or no change at all, respectively. We must defend our national position, whatever it might be, with facts, conviction and clarity, while respecting the right of others to hold different positions. The focus, folks, must be the bigger picture, informed by our carefully evaluated interests and the need to build beneficial alliances to the nation state. I repeat, nations have no friends, nations have interests. Bon voyage to those traveling to Dubai and Best Regards. Sent from my iPad On Dec 1, 2012, at 8:56 AM, Ali Hussein <ali@hussein.me.ke> wrote:
McTim
Several stakeholders made submissions to CCK on the AfCPs where we expressed strong reservations to CCKs support of the AfCPs. Our submissions were taken into consideration in the final report on the stakeholders meeting held n the 13th of November.
There will be a briefing on this on the eve of WCIT Dubai so I do hope this will be shared online.
Regards
Ali Hussein CEO | 3mice interactive media Ltd Principal | Telemedia Africa Ltd
+254 773/713 601113
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 30, 2012, at 10:42 PM, McTim <dogwallah@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
WCIT is just a few days away. Is Kenya still supporting the AfCPs, or the latest media reports :
http://www.biztechafrica.com/article/kenya-oppose-review-internet-rules/4822...
-- Cheers,
McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Wambua, Christopher <Wambua@cck.go.ke> wrote:
Listers,
I am pleased to inform you that we have uploaded the African Common Proposals (AfCPs) agreed upon in Ghana onto the CCK website. The AfCPs are available at http://www.cck.go.ke/links/consultations/current_consultations/African_C ommon_Proposals_the_ITRs_Rev.pdf
As already communicated by my colleagues, CCK shall host a stakeholders meeting on 13th November 2012 to share the proposals or Kenya's position on ITRs and collect comments/input on the same from the industry and other interested parties.
The venue of the stakeholders meeting shall be communicated in the course of the week. We look forward to receiving substantive comments on the ITRs ahead of the stakeholders meeting.
Best regards,
Christopher Wambua Manager/Communications Consumer and Public Affairs Division Communications Commission of Kenya P.O. Box 14448, NAIROBI 00800 KENYA
-----Original Message----- From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+wambua=cck.go.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of alice@apc.org Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 3:40 PM To: Wambua, Christopher Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Who controls the internet?
Dear all
I agree with Omo. Is it possible to provide/discuss substantive comments to the current proposals for revisions of ITRs to assist the CCK finalize on developing a national position.
However, I can also understand why some stakeholder are not able to contribute. It would have been good, in retrospect to have organized a session to dymystify the ITRs and the discuss the merits/demerits of the current proposals.
Apologies for adding to the noise rather than contributing substantively.
best Alice
Thanks Nd Kivuva. Somehow, I didn't receive Nd Ali's response to mine which you seem to have responded to and for which I thank you.
CCK had posted the AfCPs inviting views in order to prepare for the Ghana meeting and also the meeting in Dubai. We indicated that we subscribed to the same, having contributed to their development. There was also a request that we study Proposals from other Regions. Further, there was a promise then, and still is, that CCK would convene a meeting of Stakeholders before the meeting in Dubai. Giving or taking credit for pushing Government on its views on ITRs is inappropriate when the initiative was itself from Government/CCK.
To date, much of what I hear is not on substantive input, either on the AfCPs or Proposals from other Regions, but clamour for a Stakeholders' meeting or posting such as "thanks for a promise of a breakfast meeting" or 'pushing Gov't on its views'! We are a growing to be a society more comfortable attending workshops/breakfast meetings rather than the actual 'on the table work.' Let me reiterate that the rubber will meet the road, not in the fact that CCK has organised a Stake holder's workshop, but in a delegation that has prepared its docs, read the meeting docs/docs from other Regions and prepared to present reasoned arguments.
Even as we hail the promise of a breakfast meeting or giving credit for pushing Gov't, please let us read the postings and offer substantive comments. It would help if the local Secretariat can prepare documentation for the workshop/breakfast meeting based on views presented apriori. As mentioned earlier, the official report of Ghana is out and should be posted either today or tomorrow.
Kind rgds.
OMO, John, Commission Secretary, Communications Commission of Kenya, P.O. Box 14448 Nairobi 00800. Tel: +254 20 4242285/6 Cell: +254722523348 "I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear" - Martin Luther King Jr.
________________________________
From: kictanet on behalf of Kivuva Sent: Sun 11/4/2012 18:42 To: Omo, John Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Who controls the internet?
Thank you Ali for pushing for a government position on ITRs. When there is silence it means that 1. The government is playing their position like a secret card that should not be shown in public. 2. We don't have a position. 3. We don't understand what is being discussed.
Thanks Dr. Ndemo for the hint of a breakfast meeting to clear the air.
Regards
Ndugu Omo
Thanks for your note. I had actually refrained from posting any comments because of the Ghana meeting. In retrospect may be I should have irrespective of the Ghana meeting.
I must say that this kind of discourse is definitely helpful and goes a long way in calming the waters.
I look forward to the stakeholders meeting in the 13th Nov.
Regards
Ali Hussein CEO | 3mice interactive media Ltd Principal | Telemedia Africa Ltd
+254 773/713 601113
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 4, 2012, at 9:06 AM, "Omo, John" <Omo@cck.go.ke> wrote:
Noted and thanks Nd Ali.
We had posted a draft of the African Common Proposals (AfCPs) amending the ITRs. The AfCPs were the culmination of two preparatory meetings by Stakeholders held in Cairo and Durban. Our request was that Kenyan Stakeholders study and forward comments on the same to assist in our preparations for the preparatory meeting held in Ghana and also for a Kenyan Stakeholders meeting before the Dubai meeting. I remember getting indications that you'd study the same and revert with your comments. We are still waiting.
The way this works is this: in order to have better use of time at Conferences, stakeholders are encouraged develop proposals common to their regions. Of course Member States, being sovereign, can submit their individual proposals separate from and even in opposition to their Regions (See a number of US proposals or common to both the US and Canada,
are different from those of CITEL to which both countries are a member). But it is better that views that are similar to a region or inter-region/s are submitted and discussed as common proposals. That hastens consensus building and saves on time at the Conference. We had indicated that our views as a country was pretty much a long the proposed AfCPs to which we have contributed.
The official outcome of the Ghana meeting is now out and has some improvements to the Durban draft. We are uploading the same early
week, again with a request to Stakeholders submit substantive comments that would aid in either endorsing/not endorsing the same. The proposals will still be debated strenuously at the Conference which will take decisions largely by way of consensus. Please, please let us study
draft proposals including those from other Regions - that is where
On 04/11/2012, Ali Hussein <ali@hussein.me.ke> wrote: that this the the
rubber will meet the road in Dubai. Tentatively, we plan to have a local stakeholders meeting on the 13th Nov.
With kind rgds. OMO, John Commission Secretary Communications Commission of Kenya P.O. Box 14448 Nairobi 00800 Tel: +254 20 4242285/6 Cell: +254722523348
"I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear" - Martin Luther King Jr.
From: kictanet on behalf of Ali Hussein Sent: Sat 11/3/2012 09:17 To: Omo, John Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] Who controls the internet?
Chip
Thanks for the clarifications and updates.
Listers
I hate to bring this issue up again but should the utter and complete silence from the CCK on our country position raise red flags?
Bwana DG Wangusi with all due respect to your good offices can we have some sort of statement on this issue? I believe it is critically important that we do know and I honestly believe that whatever that position is (whether it emanates from the IGF deliberations or not) it should now be made public. We are less than two months away from WCIT Dubai.
Regards
Ali Hussein CEO | 3mice interactive media Ltd Principal | Telemedia Africa Ltd
+254 773/713 601113
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 3, 2012, at 3:07 AM, "Chip Sharp (chsharp)" <chsharp@cisco.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry I'm late to this conversation, but I wanted to point out a > few > things. > > The only proposals for revision of the ITRs that will be considered > at > the WCIT are from Member States or Regional groups (e.g., ATU, CEPT). > > This means there are no ITU proposals to the WCIT. So where the > article > says "ITU proposal" it should say "country or regional proposal". > > It also means there is no ETNO proposal to the WCIT. The text ETNO > have > proposed must be submitted by a country or region or it won't be > considered. > > The proposals that have been made public are not officially to be > considered at WCIT. The countries or regions must submit their > proposals > (again) directly to the WCIT. These country proposals to the WCIT can > be > different from what has been made public. After reviewing the current > submissions to WCIT I can say that some are different from what the > same > country or region proposed in the public document. A few of the > differences are important. So ITU would need to make TD-1 and its > revisions public to keep people informed as to the actual proposals > into > WCIT. > > ATU proposals are not yet available on the ITU website. > > Chip > **Disclaimer: these are my opinions and not those of Cisco or the US > del.*** > > On Oct 18, 2012, at 6:49 AM, "George Nyabuga" <george@afrinic.net> > wrote: > >> An interesting article in The Guardian, quoting, among others, our >> own >> Alice Munyua. But what the listers make of it? >> >> See article at: >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/17/who-rules-internet?CMP= twt_gu >> >> George >> >> >> Dr George Nyabuga >> Tel: >> +230 403 51 00 >> Head, Communications and PR, AFRINIC Fax: +230 466 67 58 >> george@afrinic.net - www.afrinic.net >> >>
----------------------------
>> Join us at AFRINIC-17 for our Public Policy Meeting in Khartoum, >> Sudan, >> on 24 - 29 November 2012 >>
>> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/chsharp%40cisco.co m >> >> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder >> platform >> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and >> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in
>> ICT >> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and >> development. >> >> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable >> behaviors >> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and >> bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, >> respect >> privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhussein. com > > The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder > platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the > ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and > development. > > KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and > bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, > respect > privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
-- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva For Business Development Transworld Computer Channels Cel: 0722402248 twitter.com/lordmwesh transworldAfrica.com | Fluent in computing kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/omo%40cck.go.ke
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder
for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alice%40apc.org
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder
---------------------------- the platform platform
for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wambua%40cck.go.ke
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dogwallah%40gmail.com
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhussein.com
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mtnndaro%40yahoo.co.uk
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.