In 2019, the book «India’s strategic options in a changing cyberspace» written by Cherian Samuel and Munich Charma was published. (New Delhi, Pentagon Press LLP in association with Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, 2019). In their work, the authors examine the general concept of cyberspace, while extrapolating it to India’s cyberspace dimension.
Continue reading Shrinking Cyber-UniverseA request for information to verify the academic qualifications of auDA CEO Cameron Boardman was been made to the Australian Department of Communications and Arts Sunday. Continue reading Questions Raised Over auDA CEO’s Academic Qualifications
[news release] The President and Chief Executive Officer of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) says all Internet stakeholders need to strive to keep Internet governance out of the hands of intergovernmental organizations. And if they fail, he warns, there could be unfortunate consequences.”Most Internet users – businesses, service providers, non-profits and consumers – would be shut out of the governance debate,” said Rod Beckstrom. “Make no mistake: if we do not address this now – effectively together – the multi-stakeholder model that enabled so many successes will slip from our grasp.”Beckstrom made the comments today during the opening ceremony of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Vilnius, Lithuania.The ICANN CEO said, “If governance were to become the exclusive province of nation sates or captured by any other interests, we would lose the foundation of the Internet’s long-term potential and transformative value.”He told the attendees that the multi-stakeholder models represented by both ICANN and the IGF allow for global inclusivity and openness, making the Internet a “fertile field for innovation and competition, an engine for economic growth.”Beckstrom said ICANN’s signing of the Affirmation of Commitments with the U.S. government, “recognized that no single party should hold undue influence over Internet governance,” and added that the agreement acknowledges the success of the ICANN model and commits to keeping the organization a private, not-for-profit organization.The IGF was formed by the United Nations and in mentioning that the U.N.’s General Assembly will decide the future the of the organization in the coming months, Beckstrom said all stakeholders should encourage their respective governments to continue to embrace the time proven and effective multi-stakeholder model.###To read Rod Beckstrom’s entire speech before the IGF, go here:
icann.org/presentations/beckstrom-opening-igf-vilnius-14sep10-en.htm.To learn more about the IGF conference, go here: www.intgovforum.org/cms/.This ICANN news release was sourced from:
icann.org/en/news/releases/release-14sep10-en.pdf
Abstract: This paper divides in two parts. The first part elaborates on the difference among categories of “legalities” that have developed on the globe, and considers their shapes and thickness as irreducible to the uniform notion of a “global law”. Different pictures and explanations affect sensibly in epistemic and pragmatic sense the understanding and the potential of the law in relation to global governance. It is the very fact of metamorphoses of law along diverse legal “formats” (one has to think of WTO, ISO, ICANN, WHO, ICLOS- about 2000 specialized global regimes-, of the newly coined “Global Administrative Law”, of transnational merchant law, of regional order of the EU, of the international legal order, of State orders, and so forth).Despite their phenomenological diversities (law as community related, law as functional regulation of field global practices, law as an interstate or as trans-community normativity, and the like) legalities overlap, sometimes in unpredictable ways and on a case by case basis.In the second part, I return to the concept of Rule of law, drawing on the institutional concept of it, as equilibrium and non domination, that I have at more length elaborated elsewhere. In the inevitable interference and confrontation between plural regulations bearing on the same activities, parties involved and legalities concerned have different depths, different “social embeddedness”, different addressees, legitimacy, functions, universalisability, purposes: how the fact of diversities of formats can be made to matter? This question prompts the role of the Rule of law, that is taken here as conceptually separate from other venerable ideals, concerning democracy or human rights. What does the Rule of law contribute in the frame of global governance? It can consistently be extended externally, being cherished internally. Rule of law concerns at this meta-level the relations among legalities, and can cause content dependent assessments to develop as a matter of confrontation in a pattern of legal public and rational discourse, making claims to be heard, differences to be considered, without supporting neither sheer self closure nor monistic dogmas. I explain how the Rule of Law contributes to re- frame a non substantive scheme of coexistence, a legal condition for the weaving of further rules of recognition: thus, out of the need of interaction and interdependence, this ideal concerning the quality of legal matrix works as well as a template of the tension toward responsible consideration of countervailing claims, preserving the equilibrium tension between the right and the good, and preventing one sidedness and unilateral conceptions of the good from being shielded “globally” by a merely instrumental code of legality.To download this paper in full by Gianluigi Palombella,originally an International Legal Theory Colloquium Paper “Institute for International Law and Justice” at the New York University School of Law, from the Social Science Research Network website, see:
ssrn.com/abstract=1561289