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.
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
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
On 04/11/2012, Ali
Hussein <ali@hussein.me.ke>
wrote:
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,
that
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
this
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
the
draft proposals
including those from other Regions - that is
where
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
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.
--
______________________
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
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/alice%40apc.org
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/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.