pakistanictpolicy : Messages : 2112-2142 of 2656

Recently, the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI), Islamabad has
presented first results of its study on "The gender digital divide in rural
Pakistan". The were shared and discussed during a meeting with stakeholders from
the private sector, relevant government bodies and academia as well as during a
workshop with representatives from grassroots level organisations working on
women's empowerment and a press briefing.

We believe that the results of the study as well as the discussions thereof
might provide an important contribution to the ongoing revision of the National
IT Policy. So far, the policy does not address gender dimensions of access to
and use of ICTs.

These resources are available at
http://www.sdpi.org/research_Programme/human_development/gender_digital_divide.h\
tml. A summary of the research findings in an article that was published in Dawn
on September 21, 2009 can be accessed at
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/in-paper-magazine/\
economic-and-business/the-great-digital-divide-199. The stakeholder workshop
resulted in an action plan proposed by the local representatives from far-flung
districts that can be found at
http://www.sdpi.org/research_Programme/human_development/gdd/GDDPressBriefing_Ac\
tionPlan.pdf.

Feedback is most welcome - best regards!

Karin Astrid Siegmann

#2113

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Wed Oct 7, 2009 1:54 pm
Subject: Making Outcome Mapping Work: Volume 2]

wsapakistan

Thought that this will be of interest to some of  you.

best wishes and regards
Shahzad

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: [OM] Making Outcome Mapping Work: Volume 2
From:    "s.hearn @odi.org.uk" <general@...>
Date:    Wed, October 7, 2009 6:56 pm
To:      general @outcomemapping.ca
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear OMers,

Im pleased to announce that, after about 18 months in progress, Jan Van
Ongevalle, Heidi Schaeffer and I have finally published Volume 2 of the OM
community book, Making Outcome Mapping Work. You can download it here
(http://www.outcomemapping.ca/resource/resource.php?id=256&utm_source=Simon&utm_\
medium=OMLC%2Bdiscussion&utm_campaign=OM%2BDiffusion).
This volume represents another years worth of community discussions,
summarised in individual summaries and also synthesised into five short
articles on what we think were the key themes:
1. OM steps
2. OM in specific sectors
3. Complimentary tools and approaches
4. Communicating and advocating for OM
5. Complexity and OM

This publication wouldnt have been possible without the contribution of
many community members who gave their time to produce discussion
summaries. In particular, wed like to thank the following members for
their valuable contributions: Kate Graham, Sharon Low, Robyn Tan, Stefan
Dofel, Bernhard Hack, Laxmi Prasad Pant and Eva Cardoso.

This project proved to be a much bigger task than initially imagined and
was very close to being abandoned many times. I owe particular thanks to
Jan and Heidi for their support and continued enthusiasm to keep the
project going.

The intention was that we would produce such a publication every year but
this has proved to be a slightly optimistic objective. We think there is a
lot of value in these summaries so if this activity proves useful and
fruitful for the community then well think about how we can make it more
streamline for the next volume. Volunteers welcome!

One final note...the publication is not meant to be polished and final and
hasnt been stringently edited. We wanted to keep it fairly rough and want
to encourage members to be free to suggest edits or additions. We may well
use this as the basis for the next volume, so please do let us know if you
have any stories or experiences that would enhance this publication.

Kind regards,
Simon

Simon Hearn
(http://www.odi.org.uk/about/staff/profile.asp?id=273&name=simon-hearn)
Research Officer
Research and Policy in Development

Overseas Development Institute
111 Westminster Bridge Road
London SE1 7JD
United Kingdom

| Tel: +44 (0)20 7922 0334 | Fax: +44 (0)20 7922 0399 |
| Email: s.hearn@... (s.hearn@...) | Web: www.odi.org.uk
(http://www.odi.org.uk) |

______________________________________________________________________

Keep up-to-date with the latest news and views from ODI:
http://www.odi.org.uk/services

The information contained in this e-mail and any attachment(s) may be
confidential. It is intended for the named addressee(s) only. If you are
not the named addressee please notify the sender immediately and do not
disclose, copy or distribute the contents to any other person other than
the intended addressee(s).

The Overseas Development Institute is registered in England and Wales -
Company No. 661818 - Charity No. 228248. Registered office address: 111
Westminster Bridge Road, London. SE1 7JD
______________________________________________________________________

#2114

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Fri Oct 9, 2009 7:24 pm
Subject: Madrid Declaration: Global Privacy Standards for a Global World

wsapakistan

http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/

Dear all,

The Organizing Committee of the Madrid Conference: The Public Voice: Global Privacy Standards in a Global World

That will be held on Nov. 3, 2009 in conjunction with the International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy

has released the following Declaration:

http://thepublicvoice.org/2009/10/madrid-declaration-global-privacy-standards-for-a-global-world.html

The declaration is open for sign on by civil society organizations and individual representatives. If your organization / or you are
interested in signing on, please email to Katitza Rodriguez, EPIC International Project Director at

privacy@.... We are requesting for both individual and organizational edorsements.

---------------------------
DRAFT (10.8.09)

�Global Privacy Standards for a Global World�

The Civil Society Madrid Declaration

November 2009

Affirming that privacy is a fundamental human right set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other human rights instruments and national constitutions;

Reminding the EU member countries of their obligations to enforce the provisions of the 1995 Data Protection Directive and the 2002 Electronic Communications Directive;

Reminding other OECD member countries of their obligations to uphold the principles set out in the 1980 OECD Privacy Guidelines;

Reminding all countries of their obligations to safeguard the civil rights of their citizens and residents under the provisions of their own national constitutions and laws as well as the human rights instruments they have ratified;

Anticipating the entry into force of provisions giving greater Constitutional force to the rights to privacy and data protection in the European Union;

Noting with alarm the growing expansion of secretive and unaccountable data surveillance by both the public and private sector, as well as the growing ties between domestic law enforcement and vendors of surveillance technologies intended for the military;

Further noting that new strategies to pursue copyright and unlawful content investigations pose substantial threats to communications privacy, intellectual freedom, and due process of law;

Further noting the growing consolidation of Internet-based services and the fact that some firms are currently acquiring vast amounts of personal data without independent oversight;

Warning that privacy law and privacy institutions have failed to take account of new surveillance practices, including behavioral targeting, databases of DNA and other biometric identifiers, the merging of databases between the public and private sector, and the particular risks to vulnerable groups, including children, migrants, and minorities;

Warning that the failure to safeguard privacy jeopardizes associated freedoms, including freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of access to information and ultimately the stability of constitutional democracies;

Civil Society takes the occasion of the 31st annual meeting of the International Conference of Privacy and Data Protection Commissioners in Madrid to:

(1) Reaffirm support for a global framework of Fair Information Practices that places obligations on those who collect and process personal information and gives rights to those whose personal information is collected

(2) Reaffirm support for independent data protection authorities that make determinations, in the context of a legal framework, transparently and without commercial advantage or political influence

(3) Reaffirm support for genuine Privacy Enhancing Techniques that minimize or eliminate the collection of personally identifiable information and for meaningful Privacy Impact Assessments that require consideration of privacy requirements

(4) Urge countries that have not ratified Council of Europe Convention 108 and the Protocol of 2001 to do so as expeditiously as possible

(5) Urge countries that have not yet established a comprehensive framework for privacy protection and an independent data protection authority to do so as expeditiously as possible

(6) Urge those countries that have established legal frameworks for privacy protection to ensure effective implementation and enforcement and cooperate at the international and regional level

(7) Urge countries to ensure that individuals are promptly notified when their personal information is improperly disclosed or used in a manner inconsistent with its collection

(8) Call for a moratorium on the development and implementation of new systems of mass surveillance, including facial recognition, whole body imaging, biometric identifiers, and embedded RFID tags, subject to a full and transparent evaluation by independent authorities

(9) Recommend comprehensive research into the adequacy of techniques that purport to deidentify data to determine whether in fact such methods safeguard privacy

Call for the establishment of a new international framework for privacy protection that is based on the rule of law, respect for fundamental human rights, and support for democratic institutions

3 November 2009

Madrid, Spain

#2115

From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:16 am
Subject: Internet Society Pakistan Chapter application to become a member organization of the ALAC at ICANN

fouadbajwa

Greetings from Seoul,

I'm participating as a Fellow in the ICANN Annual Meetings in Seoul
http://public.icann.org and following on proceedings participating in
some key meetings.

For those that may not be aware of ICANN, the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers, a non-profit corporation that oversees a
number of Internet-related tasks including responsibility for Internet
Protocol (IP) address space allocation, protocol identifier
assignment, generic (gTLD) and country code (ccTLD) top-level domain
name system management, and root server system management functions.
More generically, ICANN is responsible for managing the assignment of
domain names and IP addresses. ICANN's primary principles of operation
have been described as helping preserve the operational stability of
the Internet; to promote competition; to achieve broad representation
of global Internet community; and to develop policies appropriate to
its mission through bottom-up, consensus-based processes.

There are many ways to engage with ICANN in the multilateral Internet
Governance policy making and regulation environment and countries
should participate actively to keep their Internet environment open
for inclusive participation of Government, Academia, Research,
Business and Civil Society participation and fair competition.

Now the issue, I came across this application from Internet Society of
Pakistan Chapter (http://www.isoc.org/chapters  or
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/chapters/list.php?region=worldwide&status=A)
to the ICANN At-Large (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/applications).

I wanted to enquire from the Pakistan Telecom Grid and the Pakistan
ICT Policy Monitor Members whether there are any members of ISOC
Pakistan from them and do they believe that ISOC-Pakistan is
representative, open and inclusive to represent the interests of
individual Internet users at the ICANN? This is an important global
multilateral policy making issue that effects your country's IT Policy
Making, the Internet Governance Environment and the future of the Name
Space in the country.

For such loosely positioned groups, its necessary that the Pakistani
Internet Community is aware of the public and global participation of
such groups and whether these groups are true representatives of the
people of the country?

You are all free to share your comments and requested to check and
join this organization.

The Internet Society ISOC www.isoc.org is an international
organization that comprises of people and organizations that have made
the Internet and manage what we see today of which I have been a
member for many years and am also a Fellow. Membership is free and you
should join too.

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#2116

From: "Wahaj us Siraj/MGMT" <wahaj@...>
Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:31 pm
Subject: Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance - Draconian Law

wahaj@...

Dear all,

Today, PILDAT (www.pildat.org) arranged a seminar on PECO 2007 and was attended by, among others, Ms. Marvi Memon, MNA, Mrs. Anusha Rehman, MNA, some other Parliamentarians, Civil Society members, lawyers and FIA officers (including DG FIA).

The Parliamentarians (mostly from opposition benches) were quite concerned about this law which is at the verge of approval by the National Assembly despite the note of dissents by members of National Assembly Standing Committee on IT & Telecom. The draft Act is being placed for the session of the National Assembly somewhere next week and there’s little time left to make final efforts.

Text of presentation delivered by Barrister Ejaz is enclosed.

It is the time for the industry to raise forcefully our voice so that we can synthesize the Parliamentarians on sensitivity of this issue for present and future generations of educated youth, IT, Software and Telecom Professionals in the country. The target should be to involve media fully by arranging press conferences, articles, letters to editor, talk shows, etc., so that message gets across.

We’d be arranging press conference and other events in Islamabad jointly with PASHA, ISPAK and others. Other concerned professionals and citizen are also requested to take this to various forums before it’s too late.

Kind regards….Wahaj

Look before you leap!
And please look deep!

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2007

Overview

Cyber Offences

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

Some illustrations…

Cyber Offences

17 New Offences

Of which 14 are already covered under Pakistan Penal Code

Only minor amendments to PPC required

4 pages of definitions for about 20 offences

The Budapest Convention has only 4 definitions

Requires experienced legislative drafting

Loosely drafted offences

Casts a very wide net

See examples at the end

Cyber Offences

} Serious potential of political, commercial or personal victimisation

} Cyber terrorism

} ‘…to act…alarm…frighten…disrupt…any segment of population, the Government of entity associated with it

} An email by a citizen’s rights group to hold a rally on a public street can be ‘cyber terrorism’ since it can ‘disrupt’ or ‘alarm’ the users of that street

} Cognisable offence

} Arrest without warrant

} Exclusion of jurisdiction of other courts (Section 44)

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

PECO ignores international conventions and best practices

E.g. Article 15 of Budapest Convention 2001 on Cyber Crime – Conditions and Safeguards

‘Ensure…the powers and procedures…are subject to:

safeguards provided for under its domestic law …adequate protection of human rights and liberties…other applicable human rights instruments…

Judicial or other independent supervision

Limitations on the scope and duration of such power and procedure

Consider the impact on third parties

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

There is no requirement for mandatory grounds being given for obtaining a search and seizure warrant

Impossible to verify or challenge the grounds

The law should provide for written grounds stating:

Information received being the basis for the application for the warrant

Scope of search – limiting it to relevant content or system

Method of search, leaving the larger operations intact

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

IO can seek disclosure of:

any ‘subscriber information’ (Section 26(2))

You, me, any one…

No search warrant or other judicial permission required

If the IT company resists, its officers can be imprisoned for 1 yr

No right of privacy

All our communications can be spied upon

Other countries have sophisticated privacy regimes

E.g. Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (MP reporting direct to Parliament)

No legal recourse to prevent such spying

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

CrPC has detailed procedural protections for investigation of crimes

FIR, police diaries, preservation of case property, accused and witness statements, presentation of challan, right of bail, etc.

Over 100 years of case law preserving such protections

Courts are familiar, and preserve these protections

But Section 25 enables Federal Government to change these investigation procedures…

WHY?

Why an accused of fraud, forgery, etc. under PPC has procedural protections against abuse of investigatory powers but one accused of cyber crimes of the same kind hasn’t?

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

CrPC applies to all offences under PPC

But ICT Tribunal can dispense with CrPC ‘…where it deems necessary…” (Section 39)

Why an accused under PPC has trial-procedure protections under CrPC but a cybercrime accused hasn’t?

Will the accused have a right to go in the witness box?

Will the principles of bail under Section 497 and 498 apply to a cybercrime accused?

Can the ICT dispense with the CrPC’s requirements to record an accused’s statement, witness statements, preserve case property (computer data),, etc.?

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

CrPC is a statute and requires Parliament’s approval for amendments

But the Cyber Crime Cell’s investigation procedure can be amended at will by the Government

The ICT Tribunal can apply or disapply the CrPC at will

NO PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY OF INVESTIGATION, PROSECUTION AND TRIAL PROCEDURE

It is not sufficient to leave these to delegated legislation because these are made by the Executive and are screened from Parliamentary scrutiny

OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES DEPEND ON THESE PROCEDURAL PROTECTIONS

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

BUSINESS AND TRADE SECRETS ARE NOT PROTECTED

} The search and seizure of computers, IT Systems and Data can take place

} At any time and anywhere

} On any number of IT systems, irrespective of whether they also carry the data of non-related persons

} Budapest Convention

} Maintain the integrity of the seized data

} Consider the impact on 3^rd parties

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

BUSINESS AND TRADE SECRETS ARE NOT PROTECTED

} IO can seize commercial data

} without assurance of confidential treatment

} copies of seized data can be made without any chain of custody

} no legal recourse to prevent unauthorised disclosure to competitors

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

Valuable trade and business data can be lost

} e.g. an ISP, a data warehouse, or a telephone company’s system (or part thereof) is seized for investigation of a suspected crime is given no rights under PECO:

} To retain a verified copy of the data / hard disk

} For protection of its Intellectual Property

} For security, confidentiality and integrity of its data

} Also, no legal guarantees that:

} the computers taken into custody will not later be implanted with fabricated or false evidence

} The computers will not be damaged

} The data in the computers will not be lost or damaged

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (1)

Ahmed is a Professor in a University

His computer gets infected with a virus overnight which results in ‘spam’ being generated from his computer

Under the present law, an IO can arrest him with warrant, seize his computer and the University’s main server

If the spam is received in the computers of a bank, or post office, or any government’s office:

Ahmed can be arrested without warrant

For a non-bailable offence

Any one of us can be in place of ‘Ahmed’!

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (2)

Mr. Ali is a politician

His opponent asks a hacker to infect Ali’s computer with a virus which propagates itself to other computers

The virus results in emails being generated which incite the public to attack a religious sect

Mr. Ali can be charged with “Cyber Terrorism”

Mr. Ali can be arrested without warrant

For a non-bailable offence

It can be years before Mr. Ali is released on bail

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (3)

} Mr. Ali is a politician

} His opponent lodges a false FIR that he received an email from Mr. Ali asking the opponent to join in a public rally that will cause damage to public property

} (it is easy to fabricate such a false email)

} Mr. Ali can be charged with “Cyber Terrorism”

} Mr. Ali can be arrested without warrant

} For a non-bailable offence

} His computer and all information and data can be seized by FIA without warrant

} Later, at the police station, Mr. Ali’s computer can be ‘infected’ by a dishonest IO with various other ‘cyber terroristic’ emails!

} There is no protection in the law currently against such ‘fabricated’ electronic evidence

} It can be years before Mr. Ali is released on bail

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (4)

} Coso is a data operations company with multiple servers in a data center, which also include the data servers of a bank

} Coso’s network is hacked, enabling access to the banks’ data servers and transferring millions of dollars to a fake account

} In the morning, FIA can:

} raid without warrant

} Arrest the CEO, CTO and other officers

} Seal and/or remove all data servers (grinding to a halt the operations of other corporates who also have data servers at Coso)

} ALL data, business information, confidential information, etc. will become exposed to the IOs

} There is no assurance under the law:

} that the business information of other companies will not be compromised

} The equipment and data in the data servers will not be damaged

} Which company will want to do business in this environment?

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (4)

Najma is a poor IT student

She belongs to a non-influential family

She is given a ‘source code piece’ by a friend who had stolen it from University’s archives

Najma incorporates it in her software program for her thesis, and markets her program

Najma can be charged with “Unauthorised Access to Code”, and

Can be arrested with warrant

Her computer and all information and data can be seized by FIA

The MYTH

That all other countries have passed the same laws:

PECO is much more sweeping in its language

Developed Jurisdictions with cyber crime laws

Do not exclude Procedural Protections

} US Patriot Act an exception

} Has earned bad press and criticised by its own judiciary

robust judicial system for accountability of investigation agencies

data protection and preservation laws

The MYTH

We do not need rights-throttling laws to combat cybercrime

Rather

robust IT forensic training programme and budget for the investigation agencies

sophisticated IT equipment and facilities

Public education on cybercrimes

Industry Code enforced by PTA

Conclusions

} Without building substantive and procedural protections for the accused;

} Without ensuring integrity of investigations;

} Without ensuring integrity, confidentiality and safety of the systems and data seized by FIA;

} Without Parliament’s scrutiny of the investigation procedures;

} Without careful review by the country’s leading criminal lawyers under the aegis of the Parliament’s sub-committee;

} The Potential For Abuse, Injustice, Violation Of Fundamental Civil Liberties, Victimisation Of Opponents And Underpriveleged Sections Of The Society And Detriment To Investment And Research In The IT Industry Is Much Greater Than The Potential Harm This Law Is Supposed To Avert!

Thank You

From: Shahida Saleem [mailto:shahida.saleem@...]
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:20 PM
To: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com
Cc: 'Ammar Yasir'; 'Wahaj us Siraj/MGMT'; 'Zia Imran'; 'Awab Alvi'; 'Aslam Hayat'
Subject: RE: [pakistanictpolicy] PECO - Joint Statement

Dear Shahzad,

Developing a joint statement would definitely have a much better impact, in addition to showing maturity ion part of the industry overall. I believe this issue is one that impacts everyone, and goes beyond the individual organizations etc. If P@sha can take the lead, and get everyone on board to sign off, I think it would be a huge achievement.

Kind regards,

Shahida Saleem

Chairperson

FPCCI- SC on IT& T

From: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Shahzad Ahmad
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 10:26 AM
To: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com
Cc: 'Ammar Yasir'; 'Wahaj us Siraj/MGMT'; 'Zia Imran'; 'Awab Alvi'; 'Aslam Hayat'
Subject: [pakistanictpolicy] PECO - Joint Statement

Shouldn't we develop a joint statement highlighting our general concerns and the fact that what Minister Interior had been saying on TV doesn't substantiate in the document so why he is spreading terror through media...

best wishes

Shahzad

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#2117

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:16 am
Subject: Fw: Universal phone charger approved by ITU

wsapakistan

Interesting development...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Alegre"

* Universal phone charger approved *

A new charger that will work with all handsets has been approved by the
International Telecommunication Union.

Full story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/-/2/hi/technology/8323018.stm

[excerpt]

Industry body the GSMA predicts that 51,000 tonnes of redundant chargers
are generated each year.

Currently most chargers are product or brand specific, so people tend to
change them when they upgrade to a new phone.

However, the new energy-efficient chargers can be kept for much longer.

The GSMA also estimates that they will reduce annual greenhouse gas
emissions by 13.6m tonnes.

"This is a significant step in reducing the environmental impact of mobile
charging," said Malcolm Johnson, director of ITU's Telecommunication
Standardisation Bureau.

"Universal chargers are a common-sense solution that I look forward to
seeing in other areas."

The charger has a micro-USB port at the connecting end, using similar
technology to digital cameras.

#2118

From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:47 am
Subject: Re: Internet Society Pakistan Chapter application to become a member organization of the ALAC at ICANN

fouadbajwa

Okay then here is the proposal. I have been invited to bring Pakistan
into the ALAC through the APARALO, I will detail you on these tomorrow
as I am in the team I contribute to the ICANN in.

I am planning on bringing all of you that would volunteer when I share
the opportunities in to various areas based on your respective
experiences and roles in the field of Internet from Public Policy
Making to Technical issues such as ccTLDs, gTLDs, IDNs, IPv6 and so
forth.

My role is clear and specified, I represent and work for the
Non-Commercial Users and that is where I am serving, volunteering and
taking forward. I am not your typical case to run a family business in
global Internet policy.

For ISOC, I will be in discussion with ISOC people directly as they
are here and and let me see what I can come back to all of you with.


On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Aftab Siddiqui
<aftab.siddiqui@...> wrote:
>
>
> In my Personal opinion there is NO remarkable representation of Pakistan in
> any of the forum like ICANN, APNIC or anyother golbal forum whether its ISOC
> or PKNIC or any other society. All due respect to PASHA and other software
> base societies/org which�have done great work.
>
> Specifically talking about ISOC, I guess this is the best time to take the
> initiative.
> Regards,
>
> Aftab A. Siddiqui
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Faisal Khan <babushka99@...> wrote:
>>
>> ISOC is in Pakistan. Other than having a pretty (well not so pretty
>> page), they haven't done much. Even writing just that phrase took a
>> leap of faith.
>>
>> If you can manage to get / setup a proper ISOC chapter in PK, (people
>> can do that regionally, their terms and conditions for setting up the
>> Chapter is very well defined), it will be a good thing.
>>
>> I personally (read again, it says personally) believe that the only
>> reason the dude who got the ISOC chapter was so it could be polished
>> somewhere on his card or resume. Other than that, its been collecting
>> dust.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> FK
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Greetings from Seoul,
>> >
>> > I'm participating as a Fellow in the ICANN Annual Meetings in Seoul
>> > http://public.icann.org and following on proceedings participating in
>> > some key meetings.
>> >
>> > For those that may not be aware of ICANN, the Internet Corporation for
>> > Assigned Names and Numbers, a non-profit corporation that oversees a
>> > number of Internet-related tasks including responsibility for Internet
>> > Protocol (IP) address space allocation, protocol identifier
>> > assignment, generic (gTLD) and country code (ccTLD) top-level domain
>> > name system management, and root server system management functions.
>> > More generically, ICANN is responsible for managing the assignment of
>> > domain names and IP addresses. ICANN's primary principles of operation
>> > have been described as helping preserve the operational stability of
>> > the Internet; to promote competition; to achieve broad representation
>> > of global Internet community; and to develop policies appropriate to
>> > its mission through bottom-up, consensus-based processes.
>> >
>> > There are many ways to engage with ICANN in the multilateral Internet
>> > Governance policy making and regulation environment and countries
>> > should participate actively to keep their Internet environment open
>> > for inclusive participation of Government, Academia, Research,
>> > Business and Civil Society participation and fair competition.
>> >
>> > Now the issue, I came across this application from Internet Society of
>> > Pakistan Chapter (http://www.isoc.org/chapters �or
>> > http://www.isoc.org/isoc/chapters/list.php?region=worldwide&status=A)
>> > to the ICANN At-Large (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/applications).
>> >
>> > I wanted to enquire from the Pakistan Telecom Grid and the Pakistan
>> > ICT Policy Monitor Members whether there are any members of ISOC
>> > Pakistan from them and do they believe that ISOC-Pakistan is
>> > representative, open and inclusive to represent the interests of
>> > individual Internet users at the ICANN? This is an important global
>> > multilateral policy making issue that effects your country's IT Policy
>> > Making, the Internet Governance Environment and the future of the Name
>> > Space in the country.
>> >
>> > For such loosely positioned groups, its necessary that the Pakistani
>> > Internet Community is aware of the public and global participation of
>> > such groups and whether these groups are true representatives of the
>> > people of the country?
>> >
>> > You are all free to share your comments and requested to check and
>> > join this organization.
>> >
>> > The Internet Society ISOC www.isoc.org is an international
>> > organization that comprises of people and organizations that have made
>> > the Internet and manage what we see today of which I have been a
>> > member for many years and am also a Fellow. Membership is free and you
>> > should join too.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards.
>> > --------------------------
>> > Fouad Bajwa
>> > @skBajwa
>> > Answering all your technology questions
>> > http://www.askbajwa.com
>> > http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
>> >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
>> Manage your subscription:
>> http://groups.google.com/group/telecom-grid-pakistan
>> Browse and populate the community wiki at: http://wiki.telecompk.net
>> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>>
>



--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#2119

From: "Aasiya Riaz" <aasiya.riaz@...>
Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:14 am
Subject: RE: Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance - Draconian Law

aasiya.riaz@...

Thanks Wahaj; the forum is covered in detail on PILDAT website as well at: http://www.pildat.org/eventsdel.asp?detid=334

Aasiya Riaz
Joint Director
PILDAT
No. 7, 9th Avenue, F-8/1,
Islamabad, Pakistan
Tel: (+92-51) 111 123 345 Ext. 102
Fax: (+92-51) 226 3078
Web: www.pildat.org

From: Wahaj us Siraj/MGMT [mailto:wahaj@...]
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 7:32 PM
To: 'Shahida Saleem'; pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com; 'pakgrid'; 'telecom-grid-pakistan digest subscribers'
Cc: 'Ammar Yasir'; 'Zia Imran'; 'Awab Alvi'; 'Aslam Hayat'; aasiya.riaz@...; members@...
Subject: [!! SPAM] Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance - Draconian Law

Dear all,

Text of presentation delivered by Barrister Ejaz is enclosed.

Kind regards….Wahaj

Look before you leap!
And please look deep!

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2007

Overview

Cyber Offences

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

Some illustrations…

Cyber Offences

17 New Offences

Of which 14 are already covered under Pakistan Penal Code

Only minor amendments to PPC required

4 pages of definitions for about 20 offences

The Budapest Convention has only 4 definitions

Requires experienced legislative drafting

Loosely drafted offences

Casts a very wide net

See examples at the end

Cyber Offences

} Serious potential of political, commercial or personal victimisation

} Cyber terrorism

} ‘…to act…alarm…frighten…disrupt…any segment of population, the Government of entity associated with it

} An email by a citizen’s rights group to hold a rally on a public street can be ‘cyber terrorism’ since it can ‘disrupt’ or ‘alarm’ the users of that street

} Cognisable offence

} Arrest without warrant

} Exclusion of jurisdiction of other courts (Section 44)

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

PECO ignores international conventions and best practices

E.g. Article 15 of Budapest Convention 2001 on Cyber Crime – Conditions and Safeguards

‘Ensure…the powers and procedures…are subject to:

safeguards provided for under its domestic law …adequate protection of human rights and liberties…other applicable human rights instruments…

Judicial or other independent supervision

Limitations on the scope and duration of such power and procedure

Consider the impact on third parties

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

There is no requirement for mandatory grounds being given for obtaining a search and seizure warrant

Impossible to verify or challenge the grounds

The law should provide for written grounds stating:

Information received being the basis for the application for the warrant

Scope of search – limiting it to relevant content or system

Method of search, leaving the larger operations intact

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

IO can seek disclosure of:

any ‘subscriber information’ (Section 26(2))

You, me, any one…

No search warrant or other judicial permission required

If the IT company resists, its officers can be imprisoned for 1 yr

No right of privacy

All our communications can be spied upon

Other countries have sophisticated privacy regimes

E.g. Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (MP reporting direct to Parliament)

No legal recourse to prevent such spying

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

CrPC has detailed procedural protections for investigation of crimes

FIR, police diaries, preservation of case property, accused and witness statements, presentation of challan, right of bail, etc.

Over 100 years of case law preserving such protections

Courts are familiar, and preserve these protections

But Section 25 enables Federal Government to change these investigation procedures…

WHY?

Why an accused of fraud, forgery, etc. under PPC has procedural protections against abuse of investigatory powers but one accused of cyber crimes of the same kind hasn’t?

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

CrPC applies to all offences under PPC

But ICT Tribunal can dispense with CrPC ‘…where it deems necessary…” (Section 39)

Why an accused under PPC has trial-procedure protections under CrPC but a cybercrime accused hasn’t?

Will the accused have a right to go in the witness box?

Will the principles of bail under Section 497 and 498 apply to a cybercrime accused?

Can the ICT dispense with the CrPC’s requirements to record an accused’s statement, witness statements, preserve case property (computer data),, etc.?

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

CrPC is a statute and requires Parliament’s approval for amendments

But the Cyber Crime Cell’s investigation procedure can be amended at will by the Government

The ICT Tribunal can apply or disapply the CrPC at will

NO PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY OF INVESTIGATION, PROSECUTION AND TRIAL PROCEDURE

It is not sufficient to leave these to delegated legislation because these are made by the Executive and are screened from Parliamentary scrutiny

OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES DEPEND ON THESE PROCEDURAL PROTECTIONS

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

BUSINESS AND TRADE SECRETS ARE NOT PROTECTED

} The search and seizure of computers, IT Systems and Data can take place

} At any time and anywhere

} On any number of IT systems, irrespective of whether they also carry the data of non-related persons

} Budapest Convention

} Maintain the integrity of the seized data

} Consider the impact on 3^rd parties

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

BUSINESS AND TRADE SECRETS ARE NOT PROTECTED

} IO can seize commercial data

} without assurance of confidential treatment

} copies of seized data can be made without any chain of custody

} no legal recourse to prevent unauthorised disclosure to competitors

Investigation and Prosecution of Offences

Valuable trade and business data can be lost

} e.g. an ISP, a data warehouse, or a telephone company’s system (or part thereof) is seized for investigation of a suspected crime is given no rights under PECO:

} To retain a verified copy of the data / hard disk

} For protection of its Intellectual Property

} For security, confidentiality and integrity of its data

} Also, no legal guarantees that:

} the computers taken into custody will not later be implanted with fabricated or false evidence

} The computers will not be damaged

} The data in the computers will not be lost or damaged

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (1)

Ahmed is a Professor in a University

His computer gets infected with a virus overnight which results in ‘spam’ being generated from his computer

Under the present law, an IO can arrest him with warrant, seize his computer and the University’s main server

If the spam is received in the computers of a bank, or post office, or any government’s office:

Ahmed can be arrested without warrant

For a non-bailable offence

Any one of us can be in place of ‘Ahmed’!

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (2)

Mr. Ali is a politician

His opponent asks a hacker to infect Ali’s computer with a virus which propagates itself to other computers

The virus results in emails being generated which incite the public to attack a religious sect

Mr. Ali can be charged with “Cyber Terrorism”

Mr. Ali can be arrested without warrant

For a non-bailable offence

It can be years before Mr. Ali is released on bail

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (3)

} Mr. Ali is a politician

} His opponent lodges a false FIR that he received an email from Mr. Ali asking the opponent to join in a public rally that will cause damage to public property

} (it is easy to fabricate such a false email)

} Mr. Ali can be charged with “Cyber Terrorism”

} Mr. Ali can be arrested without warrant

} For a non-bailable offence

} His computer and all information and data can be seized by FIA without warrant

} Later, at the police station, Mr. Ali’s computer can be ‘infected’ by a dishonest IO with various other ‘cyber terroristic’ emails!

} There is no protection in the law currently against such ‘fabricated’ electronic evidence

} It can be years before Mr. Ali is released on bail

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (4)

} Coso is a data operations company with multiple servers in a data center, which also include the data servers of a bank

} Coso’s network is hacked, enabling access to the banks’ data servers and transferring millions of dollars to a fake account

} In the morning, FIA can:

} raid without warrant

} Arrest the CEO, CTO and other officers

} Seal and/or remove all data servers (grinding to a halt the operations of other corporates who also have data servers at Coso)

} ALL data, business information, confidential information, etc. will become exposed to the IOs

} There is no assurance under the law:

} that the business information of other companies will not be compromised

} The equipment and data in the data servers will not be damaged

} Which company will want to do business in this environment?

Potential Scenarios of Abuse (4)

Najma is a poor IT student

She belongs to a non-influential family

She is given a ‘source code piece’ by a friend who had stolen it from University’s archives

Najma incorporates it in her software program for her thesis, and markets her program

Najma can be charged with “Unauthorised Access to Code”, and

Can be arrested with warrant

Her computer and all information and data can be seized by FIA

The MYTH

That all other countries have passed the same laws:

PECO is much more sweeping in its language

Developed Jurisdictions with cyber crime laws

Do not exclude Procedural Protections

} US Patriot Act an exception

} Has earned bad press and criticised by its own judiciary

robust judicial system for accountability of investigation agencies

data protection and preservation laws

The MYTH

We do not need rights-throttling laws to combat cybercrime

Rather

robust IT forensic training programme and budget for the investigation agencies

sophisticated IT equipment and facilities

Public education on cybercrimes

Industry Code enforced by PTA

Conclusions

} Without building substantive and procedural protections for the accused;

} Without ensuring integrity of investigations;

} Without ensuring integrity, confidentiality and safety of the systems and data seized by FIA;

} Without Parliament’s scrutiny of the investigation procedures;

} Without careful review by the country’s leading criminal lawyers under the aegis of the Parliament’s sub-committee;

Thank You

Dear Shahzad,

Kind regards,

Shahida Saleem

Chairperson

FPCCI- SC on IT& T

best wishes

Shahzad

Reply | Messages in this Topic (7)

#2120

From: "Zahid Jamil" <zahid@...>
Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:11 am
Subject: RE: Re: Internet Society Pakistan Chapter application to become a member organization of the ALAC at ICANN

zahidjamil

Just to clarify PASHA has been to ICANN meetings and represented Pakistan. Fawad is currently representing Pakistan in the NCUC.

Best regards,

Zahid Jamil

Barrister-at-law

Jamil & Jamil

Barristers-at-law

219-221 Central Hotel Annexe

Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan

Cell: +923008238230

Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025

Fax: +92 21 5655026

www.jamilandjamil.com

Notice / Disclaimer

This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.

From: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fouad Bajwa
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 12:47 PM
To: telecom-grid-pakistan@googlegroups.com; Pakistan ICT Policy group
Subject: [pakistanictpolicy] Re: Internet Society Pakistan Chapter application to become a member organization of the ALAC at ICANN

Okay then here is the proposal. I have been invited to bring Pakistan
into the ALAC through the APARALO, I will detail you on these tomorrow
as I am in the team I contribute to the ICANN in.

I am planning on bringing all of you that would volunteer when I share
the opportunities in to various areas based on your respective
experiences and roles in the field of Internet from Public Policy
Making to Technical issues such as ccTLDs, gTLDs, IDNs, IPv6 and so
forth.

My role is clear and specified, I represent and work for the
Non-Commercial Users and that is where I am serving, volunteering and
taking forward. I am not your typical case to run a family business in
global Internet policy.

For ISOC, I will be in discussion with ISOC people directly as they
are here and and let me see what I can come back to all of you with.

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Aftab Siddiqui
<aftab.siddiqui@...> wrote:
>
>
> In my Personal opinion there is NO remarkable representation of Pakistan in
> any of the forum like ICANN, APNIC or anyother golbal forum whether its ISOC
> or PKNIC or any other society. All due respect to PASHA and other software
> base societies/org which have done great work.
>
> Specifically talking about ISOC, I guess this is the best time to take the
> initiative.
> Regards,
>
> Aftab A. Siddiqui
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Faisal Khan <babushka99@...> wrote:
>>
>> ISOC is in Pakistan. Other than having a pretty (well not so pretty
>> page), they haven't done much. Even writing just that phrase took a
>> leap of faith.
>>
>> If you can manage to get / setup a proper ISOC chapter in PK, (people
>> can do that regionally, their terms and conditions for setting up the
>> Chapter is very well defined), it will be a good thing.
>>
>> I personally (read again, it says personally) believe that the only
>> reason the dude who got the ISOC chapter was so it could be polished
>> somewhere on his card or resume. Other than that, its been collecting
>> dust.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> FK
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Greetings from Seoul,
>> >
>> > I'm participating as a Fellow in the ICANN Annual Meetings in Seoul
>> > http://public.icann.org and following on proceedings participating in
>> > some key meetings.
>> >
>> > For those that may not be aware of ICANN, the Internet Corporation for
>> > Assigned Names and Numbers, a non-profit corporation that oversees a
>> > number of Internet-related tasks including responsibility for Internet
>> > Protocol (IP) address space allocation, protocol identifier
>> > assignment, generic (gTLD) and country code (ccTLD) top-level domain
>> > name system management, and root server system management functions.
>> > More generically, ICANN is responsible for managing the assignment of
>> > domain names and IP addresses. ICANN's primary principles of operation
>> > have been described as helping preserve the operational stability of
>> > the Internet; to promote competition; to achieve broad representation
>> > of global Internet community; and to develop policies appropriate to
>> > its mission through bottom-up, consensus-based processes.
>> >
>> > There are many ways to engage with ICANN in the multilateral Internet
>> > Governance policy making and regulation environment and countries
>> > should participate actively to keep their Internet environment open
>> > for inclusive participation of Government, Academia, Research,
>> > Business and Civil Society participation and fair competition.
>> >
>> > Now the issue, I came across this application from Internet Society of
>> > Pakistan Chapter (http://www.isoc.org/chapters or
>> > http://www.isoc.org/isoc/chapters/list.php?region=worldwide&status=A)
>> > to the ICANN At-Large (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/applications).
>> >
>> > I wanted to enquire from the Pakistan Telecom Grid and the Pakistan
>> > ICT Policy Monitor Members whether there are any members of ISOC
>> > Pakistan from them and do they believe that ISOC-Pakistan is
>> > representative, open and inclusive to represent the interests of
>> > individual Internet users at the ICANN? This is an important global
>> > multilateral policy making issue that effects your country's IT Policy
>> > Making, the Internet Governance Environment and the future of the Name
>> > Space in the country.
>> >
>> > For such loosely positioned groups, its necessary that the Pakistani
>> > Internet Community is aware of the public and global participation of
>> > such groups and whether these groups are true representatives of the
>> > people of the country?
>> >
>> > You are all free to share your comments and requested to check and
>> > join this organization.
>> >
>> > The Internet Society ISOC www.isoc.org is an international
>> > organization that comprises of people and organizations that have made
>> > the Internet and manage what we see today of which I have been a
>> > member for many years and am also a Fellow. Membership is free and you
>> > should join too.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards.
>> > --------------------------
>> > Fouad Bajwa
>> > @skBajwa
>> > Answering all your technology questions
>> > http://www.askbajwa.com
>> > http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
>> >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
>> Manage your subscription:
>> http://groups.google.com/group/telecom-grid-pakistan
>> Browse and populate the community wiki at: http://wiki.telecompk.net
>> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>>
>

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#2121

From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:08 pm
Subject: ICANN Fellowships for March 2010 Kenya Meeting - 6th November Last Date

fouadbajwa

Hello All,

The Nairobi, ICANN 37th public meeting has finally been unveiled:

http://nbo.icann.org/
for fellowship application;
http://www.icann.org/en/fellowships/...
take note that there is not much time for the application.....


--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

#2122

From: "Sarmad Hussain" <sarmad.hussain@...>
Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:04 am
Subject: Nastalique and other complex Asian fonts on the mobile platform

sarmad001

Dear All,

CRULP (www.crulp.org) announces successful deployment of open source Pango rendering engine onto Symbian mobile development platform. This engine allows rendering of complex Asian writing systems through Open Type fonts. Please visit http://www.crulp.org/research/Project-Details/ALSMP.htm for some details. The current work has been on Arabic script. The picture shows Nafees Nastalique Open Type Font rendered on Nokia E51. The project aims to continue to investigate deploying Pango on Adroid mobile platform by Google and develop training material to enable the same for other scripts.

The work has been completed through PAN Localization project (www.panl10n.net), with the support of IDRC, Canada.

Best regards,

-----------------

Sarmad Hussain

Center for Research in Urdu Language Processing (www.crulp.org)

National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences (www.nu.edu.pk)

B Block, Faisal Town

Lahore, PAKISTAN

Ph: +92 42-111 128 128 (ext. 241, 315)
Fax: +92 42-516 5232

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3811 (20090129) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

#2123

From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:22 am
Subject: IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New Era of Internet for Pakistan

fouadbajwa

To All Pakistani Civil Society, Government, Business and Industry
Sector / Internet Service Providers and Telecom Companies

Reporting from Seoul!

The internet regulator ICANN has approved plans to allow
non-Latin-script web addresses, a move that is being described as the
biggest change to the way the internet works since it was created 40
years ago. This opens up Pakistan's Internationalized Domain Names
Space in Urdu, Sindhi, Pashto etc....Initially the Government of
Pakistan, Ministry of IT&T/PTA will be provided with the facility to
acquire IDN's from ICANN before the companies and individuals can! For
participation in the various processes of ICANN, I am available for
advice via email if you do not have my cell phone number. The news in
detail is below with video links:

Watch ICANN's Video about IDN's:
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid46208174001?bctid=46955584001

Read the news on CNN:
Internet domain names set to appear in non-Latin scripts
October 30, 2009 -- Updated 1213 GMT (2013 HKT)
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/29/internet.domains.languages/index.html

Read the news on BBC:
Internet addresses set for change
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8333194.stm

The Official News:
ICANN Bringing the Languages of the World to the Global Internet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
------------------------------------------
Source: ICANN Website:
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-30oct09-en.htm
Fast Track Process for Internationalized Domain Names Launches Nov 16

30 October 2009

Seoul: The first Internet addresses containing non-Latin characters
from start to finish will soon be online thanks to today's approval of
the new Internationalized Domain Name Fast Track Process by the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers board.

"The coming introduction of non-Latin characters represents the
biggest technical change to the Internet since it was created four
decades ago," said ICANN chairman Peter Dengate Thrush. "Right now
Internet address endings are limited to Latin characters � A to Z. But
the Fast Track Process is the first step in bringing the 100,000
characters of the languages of the world online for domain names."

ICANN's Fast Track Process launches on 16 November 2009. It will allow
nations and territories to apply for Internet extensions reflecting
their name � and made up of characters from their national language.
If the applications meet criteria that includes government and
community support and a stability evaluation, the applicants will be
approved to start accepting registrations.

" This is only the first step, but it is an incredibly big one and an
historic move toward the internationalization of the Internet ," said
Rod Beckstrom, ICANN's President and CEO. "The first countries that
participate will not only be providing valuable information of the
operation of IDNs in the domain name system, they are also going to
help to bring the first of billions more people online � people who
never use Roman characters in their daily lives."

IDNs have been a topic of discussion since before ICANN's inception.
It's taken years of intense technical testing, policy development, and
global co-operation to prepare the Fast Track process for its coming
launch.

"Our work on IDNs has gone through numerous drafts, dozens of tests,
and an incredible amount of development by volunteers since we started
this project. Today is the first step in moving from planning and
implementation to the real launch," said Tina Dam, ICANN's Senior
Director for IDNs. "The launch of the Fast Track Process will be an
amazing change to make the Internet an even more valuable tool, and
for even more people around the globe."

More information of the Fast Track program is available online at:
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/

About ICANN:

ICANN is responsible for the global coordination of the Internet's
system of unique identifiers like domain names (like .org, .museum and
country codes like .uk) and the addresses used in a variety of
Internet protocols that help computers reach each other over the
Internet. Careful management of these resources is vital to the
Internet's operation, so ICANN's global stakeholders meet regularly to
develop policies that ensure the Internet's ongoing security and
stability. ICANN is an internationally organized, public benefit
non-profit company. For more information please visit: www.icann.org.



--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

#2124

From: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain@...>
Date: Sun Nov 1, 2009 7:48 am
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New Era of Internet for Pakistan

sarmad001

Yes, this is indeed very exciting. There has already been significant homework on IDNs in Pakistan. MoIT and PSEB are working towards developing an IDN ccTLD registry. The community based interactions in Pakistan have been going on for past two years. The string پاکستان has been finalized through these interactions. There has been consensus on many other decisions on related issues, including developing a single language/script table to cover all Pakistani languages. See www.crulp.org/idn for details of meetings organized. Minutes have been released by MoIT (see news at http://www.moitt.gov.pk/).

regards,
Sarmad

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...> wrote:

To All Pakistani Civil Society, Government, Business and Industry
Sector / Internet Service Providers and Telecom Companies

Reporting from Seoul!

The internet regulator ICANN has approved plans to allow
non-Latin-script web addresses, a move that is being described as the
biggest change to the way the internet works since it was created 40
years ago. This opens up Pakistan's Internationalized Domain Names
Space in Urdu, Sindhi, Pashto etc....Initially the Government of
Pakistan, Ministry of IT&T/PTA will be provided with the facility to
acquire IDN's from ICANN before the companies and individuals can! For
participation in the various processes of ICANN, I am available for
advice via email if you do not have my cell phone number. The news in
detail is below with video links:

Watch ICANN's Video about IDN's:
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid46208174001?bctid=46955584001

Read the news on CNN:
Internet domain names set to appear in non-Latin scripts
October 30, 2009 -- Updated 1213 GMT (2013 HKT)
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/29/internet.domains.languages/index.html

Read the news on BBC:
Internet addresses set for change
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8333194.stm

The Official News:
ICANN Bringing the Languages of the World to the Global Internet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ICANN Website:
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-30oct09-en.htm
Fast Track Process for Internationalized Domain Names Launches Nov 16

30 October 2009

Seoul: The first Internet addresses containing non-Latin characters
from start to finish will soon be online thanks to today's approval of
the new Internationalized Domain Name Fast Track Process by the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers board.

"The coming introduction of non-Latin characters represents the
biggest technical change to the Internet since it was created four
decades ago," said ICANN chairman Peter Dengate Thrush. "Right now
Internet address endings are limited to Latin characters – A to Z. But
the Fast Track Process is the first step in bringing the 100,000
characters of the languages of the world online for domain names."

ICANN's Fast Track Process launches on 16 November 2009. It will allow
nations and territories to apply for Internet extensions reflecting
their name – and made up of characters from their national language.
If the applications meet criteria that includes government and
community support and a stability evaluation, the applicants will be
approved to start accepting registrations.

" This is only the first step, but it is an incredibly big one and an
historic move toward the internationalization of the Internet ," said
Rod Beckstrom, ICANN's President and CEO. "The first countries that
participate will not only be providing valuable information of the
operation of IDNs in the domain name system, they are also going to
help to bring the first of billions more people online – people who
never use Roman characters in their daily lives."

IDNs have been a topic of discussion since before ICANN's inception.
It's taken years of intense technical testing, policy development, and
global co-operation to prepare the Fast Track process for its coming
launch.

"Our work on IDNs has gone through numerous drafts, dozens of tests,
and an incredible amount of development by volunteers since we started
this project. Today is the first step in moving from planning and
implementation to the real launch," said Tina Dam, ICANN's Senior
Director for IDNs. "The launch of the Fast Track Process will be an
amazing change to make the Internet an even more valuable tool, and
for even more people around the globe."

More information of the Fast Track program is available online at:
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/

About ICANN:

ICANN is responsible for the global coordination of the Internet's
system of unique identifiers like domain names (like .org, .museum and
country codes like .uk) and the addresses used in a variety of
Internet protocols that help computers reach each other over the
Internet. Careful management of these resources is vital to the
Internet's operation, so ICANN's global stakeholders meet regularly to
develop policies that ensure the Internet's ongoing security and
stability. ICANN is an internationally organized, public benefit
non-profit company. For more information please visit: www.icann.org.

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pakgrid/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pakgrid/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:pakgrid-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:pakgrid-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
pakgrid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#2126

From: "eAsia2009" <newsletter@...>
Date: Mon Nov 2, 2009 6:25 pm
Subject: eAsia2009, 2-4 December 2009, Bandaranaike Memorial International, Conference Hall, Colombo, Sri Lanka

newsletter@...

eASiA 2009 Thematic Tracks

Meet the Who's Who at eASiA 2009!

Richard Fuchs Regional Director South East Asia International Development Research Centre (IDRC)	Prof V N Rajasekharan Pillai Vice Chencellor Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), India	Nagy Hanna Senior Advisor Scholar The World Bank	Reshan Devapura COO, Information Communication Technology Agency (ICTA)
Ashish Sanyal Senior Director Department of Information Technology, Govt of India	Dr V K Singh Director Indian Institute of Health Management Research India	Subhash C Khuntia Joint Secretary Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India	Ashish Garg Regional Coordinator - Asia Global eSchools Communities Initiative (GeSCI)
and many more...

eASiA 2009

eAsia 2009, is the annual international Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) for development event with the objective of reinforcing technology and knowledge-centric growth and needs of Asia vis-�-vis Sri Lanka, through capitalisation of market economy and boosting human development. eAsia 2009 � Opportunities for Digital Asia will provide the right opportunity for all stakeholders in the ICT arena to come closer and share a level-playing ground through active conferencing and networking. Spanning over three days, the event will comprise unique thematically inter-related conferences, in the domains of e-Governance, Digital Learning, e-Health, Telecentres and Emerging e-Technologies.

more...

For Sponsorship/ Registration/ Exhibition, contact us at info@...

Santosh Kumar Gupta
Mobile: +91-9891192996, Email: santosh@...

Web: www.e-asia.org

You are receiving this eASIA emailer because you are either a subscriber to our presenting publications/newsletters
(egov, digitalLEARNING, i4d, eHealth, telecentre magazine), have attended our previous events
or have subscribed electronically to this emailer. To unsubscribe click here unsubscribe@...

#2127

From: Naveed ul Haq <naveed@...>
Date: Mon Nov 2, 2009 1:52 pm
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New Era of Internet for Pakistan

naveed@...

This indeed is a significant opportunity for countries like us. It could kick start the development of Urdu-based websites which is something we are lacking ! ( as to me just typping a domain name in Urdu is not what could bring the change). A little clarification here about the role of PTA in IDN ccTLD Fast track process (this is something that is presently been made available by ICANN, for IDN gTLDs lets wait), PTA is working on numerous ICT-based intiatives putting its role as a facilitator. PTA is not directly corresponding or coordinating on IDN ccTLD rather MOIT and PSEB are the one looking after this amazing opportunity (like Dr.Sarmad stated). The role of crulp in assisting the technical issues (IDN tables, variance problems etc) are really appreciatiable, this is a win win situation for us and we all have to work together. To me we cant afford to miss this application round-up as this is what could serve our 80% (non english literate) population over Internet. Lets keep our finger crossed and remain active within ourselves.

Regards,

Naveed-ul-Haq

-----pakgrid@yahoogroups.com wrote: -----

To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
From: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain@...>
Sent by: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
Date: 11/01/2009 12:48PM
cc: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New Era of Internet for Pakistan

Yes, this is indeed very exciting. There has already been significant homework on IDNs in Pakistan. MoIT and PSEB are working towards developing an IDN ccTLD registry. The community based interactions in Pakistan have been going on for past two years. The string پاکستان has been finalized through these interactions. There has been consensus on many other decisions on related issues, including developing a single language/script table to cover all Pakistani languages. See www.crulp.org/ idn for details of meetings organized. Minutes have been released by MoIT (see news at http://www.moitt. gov.pk/ ).

regards,
Sarmad

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Fouad Bajwa < fouadbajwa@gmail. com > wrote:

To All Pakistani Civil Society, Government, Business and Industry
Sector / Internet Service Providers and Telecom Companies

Reporting from Seoul!

The internet regulator ICANN has approved plans to allow
non-Latin-script web addresses, a move that is being described as the
biggest change to the way the internet works since it was created 40
years ago. This opens up Pakistan's Internationalized Domain Names
Space in Urdu, Sindhi, Pashto etc....Initially the Government of
Pakistan, Ministry of IT&T/PTA will be provided with the facility to
acquire IDN's from ICANN before the companies and individuals can! For
participation in the various processes of ICANN, I am available for
advice via email if you do not have my cell phone number. The news in
detail is below with video links:

Watch ICANN's Video about IDN's:
http://link. brightcove. com/services/ player/bcpid4620 8174001?bctid= 46955584001

Read the news on CNN:
Internet domain names set to appear in non-Latin scripts
October 30, 2009 -- Updated 1213 GMT (2013 HKT)
http://edition. cnn.com/2009/ TECH/10/29/ internet. domains.language s/index.html

Read the news on BBC:
Internet addresses set for change
http://news. bbc.co.uk/ 2/hi/technology/ 8333194.stm

The Official News:
ICANN Bringing the Languages of the World to the Global Internet
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --
Source: ICANN Website:
http://www.icann. org/en/announcem ents/announcemen t-30oct09- en.htm
Fast Track Process for Internationalized Domain Names Launches Nov 16

30 October 2009

Seoul: The first Internet addresses containing non-Latin characters
from start to finish will soon be online thanks to today's approval of
the new Internationalized Domain Name Fast Track Process by the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers board.

"The coming introduction of non-Latin characters represents the
biggest technical change to the Internet since it was created four
decades ago," said ICANN chairman Peter Dengate Thrush. "Right now
Internet address endings are limited to Latin characters – A to Z. But
the Fast Track Process is the first step in bringing the 100,000
characters of the languages of the world online for domain names."

ICANN's Fast Track Process launches on 16 November 2009. It will allow
nations and territories to apply for Internet extensions reflecting
their name – and made up of characters from their national language.
If the applications meet criteria that includes government and
community support and a stability evaluation, the applicants will be
approved to start accepting registrations.

" This is only the first step, but it is an incredibly big one and an
historic move toward the internationalizatio n of the Internet ," said
Rod Beckstrom, ICANN's President and CEO. "The first countries that
participate will not only be providing valuable information of the
operation of IDNs in the domain name system, they are also going to
help to bring the first of billions more people online – people who
never use Roman characters in their daily lives."

IDNs have been a topic of discussion since before ICANN's inception.
It's taken years of intense technical testing, policy development, and
global co-operation to prepare the Fast Track process for its coming
launch.

"Our work on IDNs has gone through numerous drafts, dozens of tests,
and an incredible amount of development by volunteers since we started
this project. Today is the first step in moving from planning and
implementation to the real launch," said Tina Dam, ICANN's Senior
Director for IDNs. "The launch of the Fast Track Process will be an
amazing change to make the Internet an even more valuable tool, and
for even more people around the globe."

More information of the Fast Track program is available online at:
http://www.icann. org/en/topics/ idn/fast- track/

About ICANN:

ICANN is responsible for the global coordination of the Internet's
system of unique identifiers like domain names (like .org, .museum and
country codes like .uk) and the addresses used in a variety of
Internet protocols that help computers reach each other over the
Internet. Careful management of these resources is vital to the
Internet's operation, so ICANN's global stakeholders meet regularly to
develop policies that ensure the Internet's ongoing security and
stability. ICANN is an internationally organized, public benefit
non-profit company. For more information please visit: www.icann.org .

--
Regards.
------------ --------- -----
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa .com
http://twitter. com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=ATVDW1tDZzA

------------ --------- --------- ------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/pakgrid/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/pakgrid/ join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto: pakgrid-digest@ yahoogroups. com
mailto: pakgrid-fullfeature d@yahoogroups. com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
pakgrid-unsubscribe @yahoogroups. com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs. yahoo.com/ info/terms/

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#2128

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:37 pm
Subject: What IGF is for? ONI Asia event rattled by UN Security Office

wsapakistan

Greetings from the IGF,

Our ONI reception today at the IGF was rattled by IGF security, who objected
to a poster advertising "Access Controlled", the book to be introduced at
this event.
The poster was thrown on the floor and we were told to remove it because of
the reference to China and Tibet.  We refused, and security guards came and
removed it. The incident was witnessed by many.

The poster promoting ONI new forthcoming book "Access Controlled" was
removed by the IGF's organizers because a sentence in the poster violated
UN's policy. The sentence in question reads, "The first generation of
Internet controls consisted largely of building firewalls at key Internet
gateways; China's famous "Great Firewall of China" is one of the first
national Internet filtering systems."

"If we cannot discuss topics about Internet censorship and surveillance
policy at a forum about Internet governance then what is the point of
something like the IGF," said Ron Deibert Director of the Citizen Lab, Munk
Centre for International Studies,and one of ONI's principal investigators.

According to Ron Deibert of The Citizen Lab and Open Net Initiatives (ONI)
Principal, one of the organizers of the reception event, he will file a
complaint against the`censorship' of their event and send it to the United
Nations Human Rights Commission.

"We condemn this undemocratic act of censoring our event just because
someone is trying to impress or be in the good graces of the Chinese
government. It is ironic that while people are allowed to gather here to
discuss freedom of expression online, censorship and surveillance practices
on the Internet, we are being restricted in expressing our views," said Al
Alegre of the Foundation for Media Alternatives, a member of the ONI
Network.

We the members of ONI Network protest on this censorship at IGF, and ask the
question that What IGF is for, if we can not discuss Internet Governance
issues at this forum.

Best wishes and regards

Shahzad

#2129

From: <manthanaward2009@...>
Date: Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:57 am
Subject: Invite for International Conclave on Digital Inclusion for Development & Manthan Award South Asia 2009

manthanaward2009@...


About Manthan Award South Asia 2009 Manthan Award is a first of its kind initiative in India and South Asia to scout and recognise innovative ICT and digital practices and innovations in digital Content and Creativity towards digital inclusion. The 6th edition of MASA 2009 is being held in New Delhi during December 18-19, 2009 at NCUI Complex. The 2009 edition has key event verticals across all major ICT and digital inclusion for development thematic areas in the region. Launched in 2004 by Digital Empowerment Foundation in knowledge partnership with World Summit Award,the Manthan Award has come to define the very best in digital content for development. Department of Information Technology, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, India, has been the key Government support partner. MASA 2009 Event Verticals Micro Summit on e-Commerce, Entrepreneurship & Livelihood Generation Consultation on 'Governance & Digital Constituencies Consultation on Education & Learning Consultation on Health, Science & Environment Consultation on New Media & Community Broadcasting Consultation on Mobile for Masses IDRC India Social Science Research Conference & Award 2009 MANTHAN AWARD SOUTH ASIA 2009 AWARD GALA EVENING SOUTH ASIA REGIONAL ICT EXHIBITION ON DIGITAL INNOVATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT Categories for Award Recognition for MASA 2009 Community Broadcasting, E-Business & Commerce, E-Culture & Entertainment, E-Education, E-Enterprise & Livelihood, E-Entertainment, E-Science & Environment, E-Governance, E-Health, E-Inclusion, E-Learning, E-Localisation, E-News & M-Content The Manthan Award Reach & Spin Offs 2007 -> 353 Nominations -> 39 Winners 2008 -> 400 Nominations -> 33 Winners 2009 -> 378 Nominations -> 45 Winners Facilitating national digital movement through national award platforms in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in 2009 Partners Key partners for Manthan Award South Asia 2009: World Summit Award, Austria / DIT, Govt. of India / Internet Society / Association for Progressive Communications / D.Net, Bangladesh / ICTA, Sri Lanka / Ministry of ICT, Afghanistan / BNNRC, Bangladesh / FIIT Nepal Intel / IBM / Nokia Siemens Networks / NIXI / IAMAI / Mint / Gujarat Knowledge Society / MAIT / NISG / IGNOU / Edurite / KPMG / TFTP / Social Impact International Scope for Association The opportunity for association with the Manthan Award South Asia 2009 Event Programme is currently open. Interested partners may associate for: Sponsorship & Partnership Exhibition partner Publication partner Hospitality partner Logistics partner
Communications & Contact To know more about the Manthan Award South Asia 2009 Programme and for partnership options please contact: The Manthan Award South Asia 2009 Secretariat 44, III Floor, Kalu Sarai, New Delhi-110017, India Tel: 91-11-26532786 / 26532787 E: manthanaward@... W: www.manthanaward.org ; www.defindia.net
Resource persons Ms. Priyanka Chouhan (priyanka@...) Mr. Syed S. (syed@...)

Unsubscribe

#2130

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:23 am
Subject: The end of IGF? Mulling on its point and pointlessness.

wsapakistan

http://www.genderit.org/en/index.shtml?apc=f--e--1&x=96347

An excellent piece by genderIT.org team covers quite a few interesting points reflecting on the first day of IGF 09.

best wishes and regards

Shahzad

#2131

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:20 am
Subject: TAKE BACK THE TECH! 16 Days of Activism against Violence against Women

wsapakistan

******************************************
TAKE BACK THE TECH!
16 DAYS OF ACTIVISM: TAKE CONTROL OF TECHNOLOGY TO END VIOLENCE AGAINST
WOMEN
www.TakeBackTheTech.net
25 Nov - 10 Dec
******************************************

From 25 November to 10 December, get ready to click your mouse, flex your
SMS fingers and engage full energy to take control of technology to end
violence against women.

APC's Women's Programme calls on users of the radio, television, internet,
emails and mobile phones to Take Back the Tech!

//In Malaysia, women in the community are learning how to blog, and
posting their perceptions on violence against women in their own
language//
//In Mexico, women's communication rights activists and journalists plan
for 16 days of feminist tweeting on technology how-tos and against
violence against women//
//In the Republic of Congo, students will write and perform a play on
violence against women and technology//

============================
What is the campaign about?
============================
Take Back the Tech!  is a collaborative campaign for anyone using the
internet and technology to protest violence against women (VAW). Initiated
by APC's women's programme (APC WNSP) in 2006, and built by a diverse
movement of individuals, organisations, collectives and communities, the
campaign is part of the UN-sanctioned 16 Days of Activism Against
Gender-based Violence which begins on November 25 each year.

It is our right to shape, define, participate, use and share knowledge,
information and technology, and to create digital spaces that are safe and
equal. Take Back the Tech! calls all users of information and
communications technologies (ICTs) -especially girls and  women but also
men and boys- to take control of technology and consciously use it to
change unequal power relations.

Take Back the Tech! will be happening all over the world, including in
Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Cambodia, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC),
Republic of  Congo, Malaysia, Mexico, Pakistan, Philippines, South Africa,
Uganda as part of APC WNSP's efforts to achieve Millenium development Goal
3 to promote gender equality and empower women
http://www.apcwomen.org/node/695.

www.TakeBackTheTech.net

===============================
How can you Take Back the Tech?
===============================

**Spread the word**
-------------------
State your stand and help us spread the word about the campaign. Send this
message on, change your email signature or status messages to point to the
campaign website, send a digital postcard, put the campaign banner on your
site, chalk it on a sidewalk, any creative ways you can think of to spread
the word! If you are on Twitter, tweet with us by using the hashtag:
#takebackthetech. If you are a blogger, ka-BLOG with us :) Spread the word
by translating actions and slogans in your local languages, and
disseminating the campaign and its daily actions through any of your
online channels.

**16 daily actions**
--------------------
Simple daily actions throughout the 16 days show how to use technology
strategically to counter VAW. From sending SMS, to making digital
postcards, learning a new software, playing with radio or remembering
forgotten names in the history of  IT development, you can take action
with the tools and platforms you have at hand. Check the campaign website
during the 16 days to take part in daily actions.

**Ka-BLOG with us**
----------------
Explore and broaden the knowledge around technology and internet and
violence against women by joining the Take Back the Tech! 16-day
blogathon.

New to blogging? This is the perfect reason to start your own, or at
least, click that "comment" button to have your say. In Filipino slang,
"ka-BLOG" means someone you blog with, we can all blog together to raise
awareness and help end VAW. Tag your blog posts using Technorati tag:
"takebackthetech", or register your blog on the campaign website, or email
us: ideas@.... Join our movement to transform the
blogosphere!

**Start a campaign**
---------------------
Start your own Take Back the Tech! campaign. Independent and creative
initiatives to Take Back the Tech! are taking off in different parts of
the world, translating content and action to address local needs and
priorities.

Use the campaign website to highlight your action, or find information and
resources. There are campaign kits,  images and graphics, tips on how to
be safe online, articles and links, available in English, Spanish and
French.  If you don't have an online publishing space, you can have your
own page on the site. Email us to let us know how we can support your
action: ideas@....

**Digital stories, audiocasts & more**
--------------------------------------
Learn by listening to the experience and stories of women and men affected
by VAW. The campaign website will feature digital stories, audiocasts,
video clips and postcards. If you have something you would like to share,
just log on to the campaign site and submit your story.

**Suggest an action**
---------------------
Help shape the campaign by sharing your experience and ideas. If you have
thoughts, email us or log on to the site, and make it part of the
campaign.

Check www.TakeBackTheTech.net daily from 25 November to 10 December, and
take control of technology to end violence against women.

For more information: send an email to ideas@...

Join us on Facebook: http://apps.facebook.com/causes/40159
Connect with other campaigners:
http://lists.apcwomen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/takebackthetech

*********************************************************
Take Back the Tech! is an initiative of the APC Women's Networking Support
Programme (APC WNSP), a global network of women who support women's
networking for social change and women's empowerment through the use of
information and communication technologies (ICTs) especially internet,
founded in 1993. The APC WNSP is part of the Association for Progressive
Communications (APC).
http://www.apcwomen.org/about/
http://www.apc.org
MDG3: Strengthening women's strategic use of technology to combat violence
against women and girls  http://www.apcwomen.org/node/695 and
http://www.apc.org/en/node/7892/
*********************************************************
END

#2132

From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:38 pm
Subject: Example of Corporate Internet Authoritarianism - Amazon does not allow Pakistan to download Kindle Software for PC's

fouadbajwa

Issue: Example of Corporate Internet Authoritarianism - Amazon does
not allow Pakistan to download Kindle Software for PC's

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

I would like to share an example of how Corporate Internet
Authoritarianism may affect us from the developing world that I
recently encountered. The case presented is that Amazon.com's Kindle,
an e-book reader device available for - Amazon does not allow Pakistan
to download Kindle Software for PC's.

The IGF in Sharam El-Sheikh was a very fascinating event. Apart from
the many issues and arguments that arose this year, the participants
displayed use of some fascinating devices for recording or following
through the proceedings that many of us developing world people have
neither seen nor have access to. The major fascination for me was from
small FLIP HD Camcorders and various types of E-book Readers.  During
the IGF or while flying over to the event, I saw many kinds of
wireless e-book readers like Amazon.com's Kindle and some other
European models in the hands of people from the developed world. Upon
asking them the price of their devices they were all US$300 and above.
Here is the link to Kindle:
http://www.amazon.com/Kindle-Wireless-Reading-Display-Generation/dp/B0015T963C/r\
ef=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1259153142&sr=8-1-catcorr

Bringing my fascination of Wireless E-Book Readers back to Pakistan, I
have been trying to figure out how do various e-books and reports
appear on an e-book reader and whether some special format is required
to view books on such readers. I attempted to access the report
"Informing Communities: Sustaining Democracy in the Digital Age
(Kindle Edition) by The Knight Commission on the Information Needs of
Communities in a Democracy http://report.knightcomm.org/" through
Amazon.com Kindle version.

In order to read such a report on a Kindle device without a Kindle,
one has to have the Kindle E-Book Reader software installed on their
PCs. The following is the message that was displayed on the link given
below in a test attempt to download the Kindle Software for my PC in
order to read the Kindle version of the report "Informing Communities:
Sustaining Democracy in the Digital Age (Kindle Edition) by The Knight
Commission on the Information Needs of Communities in a Democracy"

a. Kindle Software Link:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/kindle/pc/ref=kcp_pc_lnd_dtl_3

b. Knight Commission's Report Link:
http://www.amazon.com/Informing-Communities-Sustaining-Democracy-ebook/dp/B002RC\
ZAIQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255448042&sr=1-1-spell

c. Kindle Software Denial Link:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/kindle/pc/download/ref=amb_link_85354831_1?pf_rd_m=ATVP\
DKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-1&pf_rd_r=1YM290GP1HNEPAGQSKS4&pf_rd_t=1401&pf_rd_p=494\
702651&pf_rd_i=1000426311

Message on Page:
We're sorry. Kindle for PC is not currently available in Pakistan.
Are you traveling outside your country?
Sign in to see if Kindle for PC is available for download in your country.
›Continue shopping the Kindle store

Would this mean that if I actually had a Kindle, I would not get
support for it or would not be allowed to have a PC version of the
Kindle software program? Interestingly Amazon.com allows you to
continue shopping but doesn't allow Pakistani's to download the Kindle
Software. Isn't that a wonderfully incredible approach from the one of
the world's e-commerce giants that continue to contribute to
increasing the digital divide over software offerings that they give
in the developed world for free but we from the developing world
cannot access it!

Print screen to see the error is posted on my blog at
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.org

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

#2133

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:22 pm
Subject: APC's assessment of the fourth Internet Governance Forum

wsapakistan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Karen Higgs" <khiggs@...>

=======================================================================
APC's assessment of the fourth Internet Governance Forum, Sharm
El-Sheikh, 15-18 November 2009

November 26 2009, Johannesburg, South Africa -- The Association for
Progressive Communications, the world's oldest online network of civil
society organisations working on ICTs and social justice, recognises the
importance of the Internet Governance Forum as a unique opportunity to
promote debate and dialogue between all stakeholders, and supports its
continuation. Here we assess the fourth forum concluded on 18 November
2009 and make a number of recommendations moving forward.

Increased recognition of the importance of human rights in internet
governance

Human rights were far more prominent in this year's IGF as reflected in
workshops and main sessions. Most significant was the consensus among
panelists from all stakeholder groups in the main session on 'Security,
Openness and Privacy' that privacy and security are not to be traded off
against one another or seen as opposing priorities which need to be
balanced. Both are equally important.

Workshops focusing on social media, freedom of expression, freedom of
information and sexuality rights all concluded that technical, legal and
other interventions aiming to regulate use of the internet should be
based firmly on internationally recognised human rights instruments, and
leave people with ultimate control over their own being, actions,
interactions, expressions and data online.

Broad consensus was reached that the development of the internet should
take into account existing human rights frameworks (e.g. the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights) that can help  ensure the enhancement of
individual and collective rights related with online communications.
Many agreed that the IGF should identify  concrete mechanisms to defend,
ensure and uphold internet rights in practice and contribute to
challenges expressed at national and international levels for the
development of regulations and/or guidelines that support the
application of already agreed upon rights frameworks.

At the content regulation and sexuality rights workshop organised by the
APC women's programme (APC WNSP) and the Alternative Law Forum workshop
participants argued that user education intended to address potential
harm in an increasingly networked world must integrate a positive sexual
rights approach to adequately respond to both the positive and negative
potential of the internet, especially in relation to children.
Over-emphasis of the �dangers� of the internet could prejudice its
comprehensive use by all users, young and old. As recommended by Wieke
Vink from the Youth Coalition on Sexual and Sexual Reproductive Health
Rights, "What we could do � what we should do, is think creatively about
age-appropriate access to pornography and about developing content which
is more gender-just and open, and about encouraging people to protect
their sexual health, e.g. by using condoms � both in the online and
offline world."

APC is with the many civil society groups who felt that a fresh attempt
should be made to propose that human rights be one of the main themes in
the fifth IGF to be held in Lithuania in 2010.
Social networking, media and privacy rights
'Social media' was the subject of the 'emerging issues' final session
and various workshops which directed attention to  the concerns of
individual users.  These concerns included privacy rights, the right to
anonymity online, the 'right to delete and forget', the impact of data
being used for purposes other than which the user intended, data being
collected without the user's knowledge, and users not knowing what
others know about them .

APC is extremely pleased that this area is gaining prominence in the
IGF. The power of the internet today is felt through user-generated
content, content sharing, and the use of social networking tools in
mobilising people against oppression and repression. It is vital that
policy and regulation enable this while also protecting individuals
against abuse.

An interesting thread in these discussions was the role of
user-education. Some people felt that educating children from a very
early age to be aware of their rights to privacy and safe internet use
should become priority. Others felt that children and young people are
increasingly using the internet on their own terms, and that efforts to
guide them are very unlikely to be successful.

APC believes that privacy advocates need to find a way to articulate
their concerns in a way that makes sense to internet users, and as an
internet community we should consider establishing norms that can be
used to better inform users when they register for social networking
sites. In the use of social networking services, users must be able to
retain control over their data and privacy, and as far as possible, to
develop both technical and legal instruments that enables this in the
simplest way. This requires the owners and operators of social
networking sites to be transparent and accountable to their users what
their privacy policies are and enable users to have control. It was
evident that research and dialogue on policy and regulation and the
behaviour of users and commercial entities is needed and the IGF is the
ideal space for continuing this exploration.

Access1

At the first three IGFs 'access' was a priority issue for APC. We
published an issue paper in 20082 on the consensus that was reached with
regard to the roles of different stakeholders (government, civil
society, business, etc.) and the importance of coherence between ICT and
development policies and public interest regulation. For IGF4, the
challenge was to build on this consensus and to showcase and share
innovative practices by operators and regulators that have successfully
advanced people's access to the internet. Unfortunately, the opportunity
to share workable strategies was not maximised and the proposal
expressed in the 2008 IGF stocktaking session to have smaller roundtable
discussions on issues where there is consensus was dropped, and the
potential for groundbreaking engagement was lost.

A major concern for APC was an observation that many actors felt that
extensive mobile penetration has resolved the access challenge. Many
parts of the world still need large scale deployment of optic fibre to
facilitate affordable access for people for whom last mile or last metre
connectivity is or will be wireless. In this light we emphasised the
importance of broadband backbone, internationally, regionally and
nationally.

Very few people can - as yet - speak coherently about mobile broadband.
Where mobile devices were spoken of, it was mainly in relation to smart
phones and their facility for social networking. Mobile internet is
immensely powerful and will resolve access issues for billions of
individual users, particularly if 'budget telecom' models are used that
make cheap 'pay as you use' internet access available. National
broadband strategies that set out the key players and their
responsibilities as well as targets for broadband roll-out that will
benefit the majority of our populations are also needed.

Cost and affordability remains at the centre of the access challenge.
Regulators are still not effectively preventing practices by powerful
operators such as inflated pricing and anti-competitive behaviour. Yet,
the debate around curtailing monopolies over international gateways and
extortionate interconnection fees - especially in Africa and Latin
America - is lacking in the IGF. This is an issue area where dialogue
and greater transparency is sorely needed and the IGF is an ideal space
for kick-starting such discussions.

These concerns were only partially addressed during this IGF, however,
access is now well established as a critical component of the governance
of the internet. The successful promotion of broadband strategies that
address the above issues are critical for the next stage of the
internet's evolution as a space for greater exchange of information,
education  and culture and as a platform for user-generated content and
participatory democracy.

A Development Agenda for the IGF

Development including measuring the impact of sustainable development,
was highlighted in many workshops and in the main session on internet
governance in the light of the WSIS principles. There was a strong
feeling that with the exception of 'access', development issues have not
received adequate attention in the IGF.

Developing country participation was noticeably low and increasing it
has to be a priority for the next IGF. The responsibility lies not just
with the secretariat and workshop organisers, but with developing
country stakeholders themselves. However, the issue of financial
resources will have to be addressed, particularly to support
participation from civil society, researchers, and small to medium
businesses in developing countries.

One way in which this can be done is to make support available for
speakers and session moderators from developing countries. During the
IGF it was very noticeable that more questions and comments were
received from the floor when session chairs, moderators and speakers
were from developing countries.

Articulating a  development agenda in internet governance would help the
IGF address a range of issues such as capacity building, developing
country participation in internet governance and in the IGF, and
substantive policy issues of concern to developing country stakeholders.

Regional perspectives

National and regional IGFs continue to grow from strength to strength
and is a very clear indicator of the impact of the IGF. A panel on
regional perspectives was included in this year's agenda. We feel these
spaces have an important role to play in linking national, regional and
global dimensions of internet governance within the IGF as a complex
policy system. The IGF should find ways to reflect regional inputs in
the global IGF agenda in a more systematic way. In addition, the
regional and national processes have to be strengthened in their own
right and the nature and character of those processes should be defined
by the regional, national and local actors.

One concern that APC has is that in the absence of more widespread
regional IGFs taking place the issues of certain regions are not being
addressed at the IGF. We urge the participants from regions such as
Central Asia, island states and Southern Africa where regional events
are not currently being convened to endeavour to do so in the next year.

Critical internet resources (CIR)

The CIR main session discussed the new Affirmation of Commitments (AoC)3
between the US government and ICANN and was seen as an important step
forward in internet governance. The AoC has generated a new mood within
the IGF in which the old stand-off regarding US control of ICANN is no
longer a central issue. Stakeholders are visibly more relaxed about
engaging on the critical issues in managing the internet. Nevertheless,
the continued US control over the root zone file remains contentious and
APC proposed  that responsibility for the root zone file be transferred
to ICANN as soon as possible.4

Application of the WSIS Principles: Towards a code of good practice on
access to information, transparency and participation5

This joint initiative between the Council of Europe, the UNECE and APC
took further steps forward in consulting stakeholders on a draft code of
good practice which was well received and a number of internet
governance institutions participated in reviewing the code and expressed
willingness to make use of the code to assess their processes as soon as
the next iteration becomes available6.

The draft document recommends
that:
The development and administration of Internet policy and standards
should be open, transparent and inclusive
Organisations active on Internet governance should disseminate
information about their work in diverse languages
Opportunities to participate in the work of Internet governance entities
should be widely publicised
Internet governance entities should actively foster participation in
their work by all those who are affected by the decisions they make, and
independently of their physical location and financial resources
All information which is relevant to Internet governance and
decision-making should be publically available
Organisations should regularly review their policy and practice with
regard to information, participation and decision making processes.

The Code of Good Practice is an instrument that can play a role in the
practicial implementation of the WSIS principles of multilateralism,
transparency, democracy and multi-stakeholder participation in internet
governance. APC's Anriette Esterhuysen co-moderated the main session on
Internet Governance in the light of the WSIS principles7. The session
explored the extent to which the IGF had fulfilled its mandate in
paragraph 72.i of the Tunis Agenda on the Information Society to
'promote and assess, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS
principles in Internet governance processes'. In this session it became
apparent that the WSIS principles have certain lacunae when it comes to
promoting human rights and development in internet governance.

Participation

The lack of sufficient developing country participation was already
mentioned above. Also important is the participation of women. If the
IGF is to be a real multi-stakeholder platform, then serious attention
needs to be paid to the still very visible gender gap at all levels of
access and participation to this forum, including agenda shaping,
representation and diversity within each stakeholder groups.

Of a positive note was the participation of young people and more
effective remote participation. There appeared to be distinct drop in
the average age of IGF participants this year. This is a great
achievement and is particularly important as we address emerging issues
such as the public policy challenges posed by social networking.

Nevertheless, many of the workshops and main sessions that addressed
issues related to the youth, did not have young people as speakers.
Remote participation, while still challenging at times, worked far
better than in previous IGFs. We want to commend all who worked to make
this happen and thank the remote participants for the effort they made
to join.

Worrying events at the 2009 IGF

ONI poster incident

On the first day of the IGF, at a lunch-time event organised by the Open
Net Initiative, a poster promoting a new book called "Access Controlled"
was removed by security personnel on the grounds that contained a
sentence that violated UN policy. The sentence in question read �The
first generation of Internet controls consisted largely of building
firewalls at key Internet gateways; China�s famous �Great Firewall of
China� is one of the first national Internet filtering systems.�
Apparently, the motivation of the United Nations Security office actions
was that the poster displeased Chinese government officials attending
the IGF. APC understands that the IGF has to adhere to UN protocols and
policies. However, it is unfortunate that some governments, by virtue of
their power and position, use protocols to stifle debate and discussion
on issues relevant to internet governance, the very objective of the IGF.

Host Country Honorary Session

On the final day of the IGF,  Mrs Suzanne Mubarak, the wife of the
president of Egypt, hosted a session. The event and resulting shifts in
the programme was only made known to workshop and main session
organisers two days before the Forum commenced. The insertion of an
unscheduled event on the last day of the Forum by the host-country
disrupted the work of the Forum. The intense security required, which
included participants being prohibited from bringing their mobile phones
and cameras into the venue, undermined  the atmosphere of open and
constructive engagement among stake-holders which is a key attribute of
the IGF.  It marred the otherwise exemplary efforts of the Egyptian
Ministry of Communications and Information Technology in hosting the IGF.

The future of the IGF

APC made a statement to support the continuation of the IGF beyond the
expiry of its five-year mandate in 2010 in the �taking stock session�8.
http://www.apc.org/en/node/9601 We highlighted the value of national and
regional IGFs and proposed that thematic IGFs be adopted as a way of
exploring issues in more depth in between the annual meetings.

Conclusion and recommendations

The fourth IGF was a little cautious with regard to making any new
innovations or including new controversial subjects for discussion.
This caution can be partly attributed to the IGF review process and a
desire not to offend any constituency when the IGF�s future is at stake.
The US government�s Affirmation of Commitments which gives ICANN greater
independence from US control also took the sting out of the contentious
debates of the past IGFs on critical internet resources management and
enhanced cooperation on public policy principles affecting such
management. The issue of linguistic diversity has been emerging strongly
albeit primarily  through the focus on Internationalised Domain Names).

The consensus on privacy and security being equally important aspects of
internet governance rather than critical issues that need to be balanced
or traded off against one another is significant and paves the way for
the discussion of a global privacy standard. Perhaps these are signs of
maturity � that the IGF has reached a certain equilibrium and acceptance
of itself as an open space for constructive, forward-looking policy
dialogue.

Going forward APC would like to recommend the following:

1. Regional and national IGFs

APC as a co-convenor of the Latin American and Caribbean and East
African IGFs supports the idea of regional IGFs that can serve the
purpose of defining regional priorities and enabling greater
participation from multiple stakeholders at regional level. We believe
that national IGFs are a powerful mechanism for learning, problem
solving, collective action and building partnership among different
stakeholders at national level. We can commit to participating in
convening regional IGFs in Southern Africa, Southern Europe and South
East Asia - all regions which we feel are not adequately participating
in the global IGF.

2. Thematic IGFs

To address the need  for more in-depth discussion of certain issues in a
maturing IGF APC recommends the introduction of thematic IGFs between
global IGFs. Thematic IGFs can provide forums for individuals with the
necessary expertise from different stakeholder groups to engage specific
issues in greater depth and then communicate the outcomes of their
discussions to the internet community at large, or to specific institutions.

Issues which require more in-depth multi-stakeholder engagement that
emerged at the 2009 IGF include the development of global privacy
standards, user literacy and education, the future of the root zone
file, and a Development Agenda on internet governance.

3. Main sessions on development and on human rights

As stated above we believe that a main session on human rights in
internet governance and a development agenda for internet governance
should be included in the next IGF. We propose that a draft outline of
issues that can form a development agenda in the IGF be developed and
discussed just before the February 2010 open consultation. It can then
be presented for feedback at regional IGFs.

4. Effective resourcing of the IGF secretariat

Over the years of its existence the IGF has developed an adaptive
ecosystem in which all stakeholders can interact on the basis of
equality of input. This is an important dimension which depends on the
adroit and careful shepherding of the IGF performed by the IGF
secretariat under the effective and diplomatic leadership of Nitin Desai
and Markus Kummer. The vital role of the IGF secretariat in its current
form to the success of the IGF should not be under-estimated. We have
heard a lot of corridor talk that the status of the secretariat should
be changed in some way and located more firmly in the UN system. We feel
that the IGF should continue to operate under the auspices of the UN
while continually aiming to enhance its multi-stakeholder nature. If the
IGF is to continue to succeed and make further strides in fulfilling its
mandate, the secretariat needs to be properly resourced.

Some stakeholders think that those countries who provide financial
support to the IGF have more say over its annual programme as a
consequence of their funding of the IGF secretariat. We have not found
this assertion to be true. The IGF secretariat needs independence from
any form of undue influence. We propose that a terms of reference for
donations could be put in place to protect the IGF secretariat�s
independence. In addition, there should be a travel fund for speakers
from developing countries that is accessible and transparently managed
by a multi-stakeholder group, in order to prevent a single stakeholder
exerting undue influence over the selection of funded participants in
the IGF.

5. Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Group meetings and open consultations

We propose that the open consultation be extended to two days and the
MAG meeting reduced to one day. This would maximise the openness of the
process by which input is received and discussed.

6. Innovative and creative meeting formats

We recommend that the IGF continue to develop innovative and creative
meeting formats. The suggestions made earlier in the year at the open
consultations on the IGF programme to have round-table discussions aimed
at building consensus on issues like accessibility, access or child
protection were not taken forward. The super sessions were a step
forward and because they were three hours long it was easier for
faciltators to involve remote participants in the workshops. We feel
that a fresh attempt should be made at IGF5 to experiment with
round-table discussions.

7. Learning from experience in taking stock and going forward

We encourage the secretariat and the hosts of the first four IGFs,
Greece, Brazil, India and Egypt to convene to share lessons learned from
hosting the IGFs and to submit a report to the UN Secretary General and
the Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) as part
of the input into the continuation of the IGF.

Finally, we would like to thank all who contributed to the fourth IGF:
the government of Egypt, the IGF secretariat, the Multi-Stakeholder
Advisory Group, dynamic coalitions and workshop organisers, those who
provided financial support, speakers and moderators, the Egyptian
volunteers who provided technical and logistical support, and all the
IGF participants who help make this such a unique event.

1 of 1 File(s)

APCIGF4Assessment_EN.pdf

#2134

From: "fouadbajwa" <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:39 am
Subject: State of Telecom Industry In Pakistan 2008-09 - Highlights

fouadbajwa

According to a recent report by Business Recorder Pakistan, the Pakistani
Telecom sector has depicted a remarkable 20 percent growth. Source:
http://www.brecorder.com/index.php?id=988885&currPageNo=1&query=&search=&term=&s\
upDate

The following are the important highlights fiscal year 2008-09 (July 2008 - 
June 2009):
(Thanking Telecompk source
http://telecompk.net/2009/11/22/pta-telecom-industry-pakistan-2008-09/)

You may also be interested in viewing this analysis presented earlier this year:
tate of the Telecom Industry of Pakistan Final
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16255055/State-of-the-Telecom-Industry-of-Pakistan-Fin\
al


Highlights
----------

- Telecom sector revenue grew by 20 percent and generated Rs 327.8 billion as
revenue

- Telecom sector paid Rs 112 billion as tax

- Tele-density (percentage of mobile users) of Pakistan stood at 62 percent
showing a growth rate of 5.4 percent.

- Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) stood at 815 million dollar

- Total investments in the sector stood at 1.7 billion dollar

- Telecom imports also grew by 20 percent and reached 1.6 billion dollar


Mobile Sector
-------------

- The mobile penetration reached 58.2 percent of the total population

- Total mobile subscribers reached 94.3 million (as of September end the number
is 95.9 million) with more than 90 percent of the country having access to
mobile services

-Prepaid subscription is 98 percent, whereas only 2 percent subscribers are
post-paid

- Revenue: cellular revenues grew by 16 percent and stood at Rs 212 billion at
the end of 2008-09
The mobile investments dropped by 48 percent and reached 1.2 billion dollar in
the year under review


LL and WLL
----------

- Basic services (LL. WLL & LDI) showed a healthy revenue growth rate of 26
percent contributing Rs 113 billion to the sector revenue which is around 34
percent of the total telecom sector revenue

- With the declining trend in fixed line tele-density reaching 2.2 percent with
a total of 3.5 million fixed-line subscribers in the country

- Wireless local loop (WLL) tele-density stands at 1.6 percent with 2.65 million
subscribers across Pakistan

#2135

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:46 am
Subject: Five Year IT Policy Ready???

wsapakistan

Just saw this ticker on a news channel... can't remember which one that Five Year IT Policy is ready to be announced SOON. Anyone know about this? Which policy is this? The one being developed by Planning Commission or the one by MoITT?

On a different note, as per Supreme Courts decision since PECO could not be passed through national assembly so tomorrow it will not be effective anymore. Am I right to understand this?

best wishes

Shahzad

#2136

From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:14 pm
Subject: Re: Five Year IT Policy Ready???

fouadbajwa

Hi Shahzad,

I have similar mixed feelings about this news. The NEWS officially
reported that:
Task force on ICT submits IT policy to planning commission
http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=92327

In response to this yesterday Rabia Gharid of CIO Magazine posted this message:
http://ciopakistan.com/2009/11/task-force-on-ict-submits-it-policy-document-to-p\
lanning-commission-netsol-pr/
there was no reaction from the Pakistan ICT Policy Monitor nor the
other stakeholders in the original ICT Policy process that was
initiated last year but over taken by the Task Force on ICT by Netsol.

I was afraid of this and despite the fact that we continuously
contacted the govt, a policy devised only on one stakeholder's input,
from the private sector only is about to determine the future for the
rest of the stakeholders. This an unacceptable approach dropping out
all the multistakeholders that originally made up the composition of
the national IT Policy redraft multistakeholders group!

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Just saw this ticker on a news channel... can't remember which one that Five
Year IT Policy is ready to be announced SOON. Anyone know about this? Which
policy is this? The one being developed by Planning Commission or the one by
MoITT?
>
> On a different note, as per Supreme Courts decision since PECO could not be
passed through national assembly so tomorrow it will not be effective anymore.
Am I right to understand this?
>
> best wishes
> Shahzad
>
>
>

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

#2137

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:34 pm
Subject: Re: Five Year IT Policy Ready???

wsapakistan

Dear Fouad,

You are well aware that from the very start of the process by MoITT, how
well we were engaged with this but then were excluded by the Planning
Commission due to obvious reasons that Govt didn't want interventions by the
civil society.

We had been monitoring this at MoITT level and were informed that the
process is in limbo... BUT now suddenly the policy has been developed and
even ready to be announced.

Can not comment about the actual document until have seen it but just to
clarify that we were and we wanted to be engaged with policy development
process.

best wishes
Shahzad

----- Original Message -----
From: "Fouad Bajwa" <fouadbajwa@...>
To: <pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com>;
<bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Hi Shahzad,

I have similar mixed feelings about this news. The NEWS officially
reported that:
Task force on ICT submits IT policy to planning commission
http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=92327

In response to this yesterday Rabia Gharid of CIO Magazine posted this
message:
http://ciopakistan.com/2009/11/task-force-on-ict-submits-it-policy-document-to-p\
lanning-commission-netsol-pr/
there was no reaction from the Pakistan ICT Policy Monitor nor the
other stakeholders in the original ICT Policy process that was
initiated last year but over taken by the Task Force on ICT by Netsol.

I was afraid of this and despite the fact that we continuously
contacted the govt, a policy devised only on one stakeholder's input,
from the private sector only is about to determine the future for the
rest of the stakeholders. This an unacceptable approach dropping out
all the multistakeholders that originally made up the composition of
the national IT Policy redraft multistakeholders group!

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> Just saw this ticker on a news channel... can't remember which one that
> Five Year IT Policy is ready to be announced SOON. Anyone know about this?
> Which policy is this? The one being developed by Planning Commission or
> the one by MoITT?
>
> On a different note, as per Supreme Courts decision since PECO could not
> be passed through national assembly so tomorrow it will not be effective
> anymore. Am I right to understand this?
>
> best wishes
> Shahzad
>
>
>

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

#2138

From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 2:27 pm
Subject: Re: Five Year IT Policy Ready???

fouadbajwa

The sudden action on this is what I am referring to. I was contacted
when I was in Malaysia in December 2008 last year by our network
stakeholders that two meetings had taken place under the umbrella of
NetSol and our representatives from the various technology
associations were in attendance during those meetings and despite
their protests to the structure and working of the group, this report
forwarded by the self-proclaimed IT Task Force is well informed
amongst all the participants of those meetings.

I would like to share the following message Imran Zia of P@SHA at that
early stage:

Originally from Imran Zia to Mr. Ghauri/IT Task Force:

Assalam-o-Alikum,

I am writing to you on behalf of P@SHA (Pakistan Software Houses
Association for IT & ITES). We weren't in the previous kick-off
meeting due to our travel schedule conflicts but we have gone through
the meeting minutes and goals and objectives shared with the
participants in the last meeting. We have significant feedback to
share. And I would like to take a few moments to share what we have to
contribute to this task force and our comments on progress so far.

Establishing this task force to make recommendations to the Govt. of
Pakistan is absolutely a fantastic idea. Previously in September the
MoITT had organized a seminar in Lahore to start work on a similar
initiative. There was wide participation from the industry at large,
civic society, open software organizations in Pakistan, hardware
providers, software companies of all sizes and many others. We had a
very healthy debate on what needed to be done and we were very
encouraged that the process for formulating the next ICT policy in
Pakistan had become an all inclusive process.

On that note, here are a few observations.

1. The current structure of working groups is a good start but these
groups are incomplete in our humble opinion. Some groups have
significant and most important players missing. For example the
Working Group on Quality of Education Policy ought to have P@SHA in
it. We represent a segment that is one of the largest consumers of CS
and engineering graduates in the country. We have been going to
Universities on our own to share our views and our needs. P@SHA did a
seminar at FAST Lahore earlier in the year to discuss just that. The
working group on IT Security and E-commerce as well as
Telecommunication and Network Infrastructure lacks the participation
of .pk TLD.

Ladies and Gentlemen we have missed significant players in the
formation of these working groups. On my own count, P@SHA needs to be
in 5 or 6 of these working groups and it is only mentioned in one. In
fact P@SHA should be one of the key stakeholders in the formation of
the Policty framework, not just one of the participants. The open
source community is very active in Pakistan and I don�t see us
extending a hand to them for participation. There is a group called
the Pakistan ICT Policy group set up by Bytes4All which has all
stakeholders as participants. They should be part of the taskforce as
should media organizations � mainstream as well as new media - as much
of the policy that is developed will affect all of them. We will also
need the media to obtain feedback from those who are not part of the
initial process, to create awareness and to help spread the word.

There are certain government entities that ought to be invited here
too. National ICT R&D Fund for example has to be included.

I think we need to do more to bring in all the relevant players here.

My second point is regarding the structure of working groups. They
need to be open to everyone to participate. In my industry, we have a
very healthy and diverse set of companies. I don�t find these
companies represented here. How about product development focused
companies, in hardware, in software, in emerging technologies. How
about companies of varying sizes? If the size of the companies is the
determining factor in being able to participate, I am sorry to say the
policy apparatus will be dysfunctional and not representative of the
industry. Setting up a reasonable deadline (with consultation of
participants) for completion of policy making task is important but
not to the exclusion of most important players in certain working
groups.
We absolutely need a serious debate on formation of these groups. I
strongly recommend that these be open to everyone who wants to join.
Why not publish this initiative on the Internet, advertise it and have
people sign up on the Internet.

2. Building on the last point, I would also encourage that we use ICT
to encourage participation in the process. Why not have a call-in
number to listen to what is happening here. Why not broadcast the
working of this committee on the Internet. This is a connected world
my colleagues. We ought to demonstrate that we are drinking our own
Kool-Aid if I can be facetious here. More brains at work, the more
ideas will be generated.

3. We need to ponder on the policy making process here. While a lot of
good ideas were discussed in the last meeting, a discussion needs to
take place on setting guidelines for consensus building, conflict
resolution and bringing in more participation. We need to be good
Project Managers. Last night I said no to a client on a decent sized
work I could have got. Why? Because our analysis showed that the
deadlines requested by the project owner were simply ridiculous. We
need to put the horse before the cart. Discuss what needs to be done,
what needs to be in place, what tools and what input we need from all
stakeholders and how we incorporate it. How we resolves conflicts and
differences of opinion in working groups. Once we have the process
nailed down, then we go very very aggressively on a time line. We are
no slackers here and everyone who has been in the ICT business knows
the working hours and commitment we demonstrate to our profession. We
will give it our all once we have a solid framework in place. That is
the right way to do it.

4. At the tail end of the policy making process, we ought to have an
open to public form as well as put the initial version of final
recommendations on the Internet and open it for feedback from all
quarters. Follow that with the Working Groups meeting again to
incorporate this feedback into the recommendations. We are back to
democracy aren�t we so let do the same for the policy making process
of this task force.

I am hoping that the authorities arranging this task force and Working
Groups will take my recommendations of opening up the process to a
wider set of stakeholders with an open heart.
If the wider participation of the ICT sector and the civil society is
considered problematic for the workings of this task force, P@SHA
would seriously doubt the value of its participation in the process.
After all we have a fiduciary responsibility to our member companies
and society at large.

Thank You.

Now what can we say?

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...> wrote:
> Dear Fouad,
>
> You are well aware that from the very start of the process by MoITT, how
> well we were engaged with this but then were excluded by the Planning
> Commission due to obvious reasons that Govt didn't want interventions by the
> civil society.
>
> We had been monitoring this at MoITT level and were informed that the
> process is in limbo... BUT now suddenly the policy has been developed and
> even ready to be announced.
>
> Can not comment about the actual document until have seen it but just to
> clarify that we were and we wanted to be engaged with policy development
> process.
>
> best wishes
> Shahzad
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fouad Bajwa" <fouadbajwa@...>
> To: <pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com>;
> <bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 5:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???
>
>
> Hi Shahzad,
>
> I have similar mixed feelings about this news. The NEWS officially
> reported that:
> Task force on ICT submits IT policy to planning commission
> http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=92327
>
> In response to this yesterday Rabia Gharid of CIO Magazine posted this
> message:
>
http://ciopakistan.com/2009/11/task-force-on-ict-submits-it-policy-document-to-p\
lanning-commission-netsol-pr/
> there was no reaction from the Pakistan ICT Policy Monitor nor the
> other stakeholders in the original ICT Policy process that was
> initiated last year but over taken by the Task Force on ICT by Netsol.
>
> I was afraid of this and despite the fact that we continuously
> contacted the govt, a policy devised only on one stakeholder's input,
> from the private sector only is about to determine the future for the
> rest of the stakeholders. This an unacceptable approach dropping out
> all the multistakeholders that originally made up the composition of
> the national IT Policy redraft multistakeholders group!
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Just saw this ticker on a news channel... can't remember which one that
>> Five Year IT Policy is ready to be announced SOON. Anyone know about this?
>> Which policy is this? The one being developed by Planning Commission or
>> the one by MoITT?
>>
>> On a different note, as per Supreme Courts decision since PECO could not
>> be passed through national assembly so tomorrow it will not be effective
>> anymore. Am I right to understand this?
>>
>> best wishes
>> Shahzad
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards.
> --------------------------
> Fouad Bajwa
> Advisor & Researcher
> ICT4D & Internet Governance
> Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
> Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
> My Blog: Internet's Governance
> http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
> Follow my Tweets:
> http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
> MAG Interview:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

#2139

From: Javed Naushahi <jnaushahi@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 1:43 pm
Subject: Re: Five Year IT Policy Ready???

jnaushahi

Ibtida e Ishq hay rota hay kia

Aagay aagay dekhiey hota hay kia

This is unfortunate!

Computer Society darfted the first IT Policy in 1999, that was adopted by Dr. Atta in MoITT, the documents was made comprehensive after input from +200 IT professionals those participated in formulation of IT Policy.

Action plan for Rs.4/billion was also there, its the implementation that was not done, only Rs. 400/m spent that was given to univerities. Focus shifted to Mobile telephony year 2001 onwards, and all forgot IT goals. $20/billion was spent in Telecom since year 2000, but IT share is less than 10%.

I am afraid due to mutual business interest of Netsol+AOS the document has been kept close to chest. It shall be a public document; discussed publically through a process under Member IT, MoITT. Ownership is with MoITT.

The key of each national IT policy is (electronic) Integration of economy; that include business & industry, Govt, trade, logistics, banking, citizen and other stakeholders. All other items revolves around it.

It is missing.

FBR is loosing RS. 1000/billion every year, and State Bank of Pakistan $10/billion every year in foreign exchange due to non-implementation of IT Policy.

Foreign exchange management was outrourced to Kalia; and indirct FBR Revenue collection to Agility (American company) represented by AOS in Pakistan due to non-implementation of action plan.

Netsol is also NASDAQ listed American company.

IT policy is sandwithed between 2 seths.

Tum baltao keh hum batlain kia.

Lets' join hands.

From: Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...>
To: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com; bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 4:34:49 AM
Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Dear Fouad,

You are well aware that from the very start of the process by MoITT, how
well we were engaged with this but then were excluded by the Planning
Commission due to obvious reasons that Govt didn't want interventions by the
civil society.

We had been monitoring this at MoITT level and were informed that the
process is in limbo... BUT now suddenly the policy has been developed and
even ready to be announced.

Can not comment about the actual document until have seen it but just to
clarify that we were and we wanted to be engaged with policy development
process.

best wishes
Shahzad

----- Original Message -----
From: "Fouad Bajwa" <fouadbajwa@...>
To: <pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com>;
<bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Hi Shahzad,

I have similar mixed feelings about this news. The NEWS officially
reported that:
Task force on ICT submits IT policy to planning commission
http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=92327

In response to this yesterday Rabia Gharid of CIO Magazine posted this
message:
http://ciopakistan.com/2009/11/task-force-on-ict-submits-it-policy-document-to-planning-commission-netsol-pr/
there was no reaction from the Pakistan ICT Policy Monitor nor the
other stakeholders in the original ICT Policy process that was
initiated last year but over taken by the Task Force on ICT by Netsol.

I was afraid of this and despite the fact that we continuously
contacted the govt, a policy devised only on one stakeholder's input,
from the private sector only is about to determine the future for the
rest of the stakeholders. This an unacceptable approach dropping out
all the multistakeholders that originally made up the composition of
the national IT Policy redraft multistakeholders group!

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> Just saw this ticker on a news channel... can't remember which one that
> Five Year IT Policy is ready to be announced SOON. Anyone know about this?
> Which policy is this? The one being developed by Planning Commission or
> the one by MoITT?
>
> On a different note, as per Supreme Courts decision since PECO could not
> be passed through national assembly so tomorrow it will not be effective
> anymore. Am I right to understand this?
>
> best wishes
> Shahzad
>
>
>

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pakistanictpolicy/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pakistanictpolicy/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
pakistanictpolicy-digest@yahoogroups.com
pakistanictpolicy-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
pakistanictpolicy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#2140

From: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 2:48 pm
Subject: Re: Five Year IT Policy Ready???

fouadbajwa

According to the initial information we have on this from last year and this:

1. Salim Ghauri was the Chairman of the Task Force appointed without
the mutual consent of the multistakeholders and participants of the
first and actual National IT Policy Redraft under NIDU and Pakistan
Software Export Board and Ministry of IT where Mr. Ghauri was not
present at all. We the stakeholders of the national consultation were
not informed of Mr. Ghauri's involvement by the govt nor involved
within Mr. Ghauri's involvement.

2. The working groups have been meeting at NetSol Village in Lahore
headed by Salim Ghauri, Chairman of this Task Force.Thus most of the
drafting activity took place within a private corporate concern. None
of the activity took place under the Ministry of IT Premises which is
a key concern that national policy making now happens in private
sector companies? What about transparency of the process of policy
making?

3. Multistakeholder representation from these meetings was discouraged
and more private sector involved including people of  companies like
Aezaz from Systems Ltd and Sajjad Kirmani (NetSol) and it was also
reported that there were more people in the meeting from NetSol than
from the rest of the stakeholders.

4. It was also informed that major players were absent from certain
groups (.pk TLD missing from the e-security work group, pakistan ICT
policy monitor, bytesforall, telecom grid, pakistan research grid
missing representing the civic society).

5. Access by anyone willing to participate and be allowed to join
through open enrollment on the web was denied.

6. Certain segments were totally ignored, for example, the free and
open source community was not part of any working group.

7. The Civil Society and media in general were excluded form all the
working groups.

8. There was no review period for the public before anything was published.

9. Mr. Ghauri had originally declined the request for public
participation because: He declined open invitation to anyone
interested because that slows down the process!

10. Chairmen of working groups were considered as full authority and
no one could participate without their consents.

11. Observation: Why is it that a national level task force was headed
by one company? It ought to be someone industry neutral or if it has
to be industry then it ought to be a trade body like P@SHA.

12. The work of the working groups was supposed to be completed by end
of 2008. The public was kept out of the process for over a year now.

This is the reality of the situation.

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Javed Naushahi <jnaushahi@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Ibtida e Ishq hay rota hay kia
>
> Aagay aagay dekhiey hota hay kia
>
>
>
> This is unfortunate!
>
>
>
> Computer Society darfted the first IT Policy in 1999, that was adopted by Dr.
Atta in MoITT, the documents was made comprehensive after input from +200 IT
professionals those participated in formulation of IT Policy.
>
>
>
> Action plan for Rs.4/billion was also there, its the implementation that was
not done, only Rs. 400/m spent that was given to univerities. Focus shifted to
Mobile telephony year 2001 onwards, and all forgot IT goals. $20/billion was
spent in Telecom since year 2000, but IT share is less than 10%.
>
>
>
>
>
> I am afraid due to mutual business interest of Netsol+AOS the document has
been kept close to chest. It shall be a public document; discussed publically
through a process under Member IT, MoITT. Ownership is with MoITT.
>
>
>
> The key of each national IT policy is (electronic) Integration of economy;
that include business & industry, Govt, trade, logistics, banking, citizen and
other stakeholders. All other items revolves around it.
>
>
>
> It is missing.
>
>
> FBR is loosing RS. 1000/billion every year, and State Bank of Pakistan
$10/billion every year�in foreign exchange due to non-implementation of IT
Policy.
>
> Foreign exchange management was outrourced to Kalia; and indirct FBR Revenue
collection to Agility (American company) represented by AOS in Pakistan due to
non-implementation of action plan.
>
> Netsol is also NASDAQ listed�American company.
>
> IT policy is sandwithed between 2 seths.
>
> Tum baltao keh hum batlain kia.
>
> Lets' join hands.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...>
> To: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com; bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 4:34:49 AM
> Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???
>
> Dear Fouad,
>
> You are well aware that from the very start of the process by MoITT, how
> well we were engaged with this but then were excluded by the Planning
> Commission due to obvious reasons that Govt didn't want interventions by the
> civil society.
>
> We had been monitoring this at MoITT level and were informed that the
> process is in limbo... BUT now suddenly the policy has been developed and
> even ready to be announced.
>
> Can not comment about the actual document until have seen it but just to
> clarify that we were and we wanted to be engaged with policy development
> process.
>
> best wishes
> Shahzad
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fouad Bajwa" <fouadbajwa@...>
> To: <pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com>;
> <bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 5:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???
>
>
> Hi Shahzad,
>
> I have similar mixed feelings about this news. The NEWS officially
> reported that:
> Task force on ICT submits IT policy to planning commission
> http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=92327
>
> In response to this yesterday Rabia Gharid of CIO Magazine posted this
> message:
>
http://ciopakistan.com/2009/11/task-force-on-ict-submits-it-policy-document-to-p\
lanning-commission-netsol-pr/
> there was no reaction from the Pakistan ICT Policy Monitor nor the
> other stakeholders in the original ICT Policy process that was
> initiated last year but over taken by the Task Force on ICT by Netsol.
>
> I was afraid of this and despite the fact that we continuously
> contacted the govt, a policy devised only on one stakeholder's input,
> from the private sector only is about to determine the future for the
> rest of the stakeholders. This an unacceptable approach dropping out
> all the multistakeholders that originally made up the composition of
> the national IT Policy redraft multistakeholders group!
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Just saw this ticker on a news channel... can't remember which one that
> > Five Year IT Policy is ready to be announced SOON. Anyone know about this?
> > Which policy is this? The one being developed by Planning Commission or
> > the one by MoITT?
> >
> > On a different note, as per Supreme Courts decision since PECO could not
> > be passed through national assembly so tomorrow it will not be effective
> > anymore. Am I right to understand this?
> >
> > best wishes
> > Shahzad
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards.
> --------------------------
> Fouad Bajwa
> Advisor & Researcher
> ICT4D & Internet Governance
> Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
> Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
> My Blog: Internet's Governance
> http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
> Follow my Tweets:
> http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
> MAG Interview:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

#2141

From: "Shahzad Ahmad" <shahzad@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:08 pm
Subject: Re: Five Year IT Policy Ready???

wsapakistan

Javed Sab... Aali Jah,

Thoroughly enjoyed reading your poetry mixed post :) and yes fully agree with all the pertinent issues you have raised.

We were only hoping that the incoming Member IT with renewed vigor, would take some charge and start involving other stakeholders but then it never happened. Hope remains forever though :)

Am now very keen and curious to know how and what they have cooked for the policy... I feel dejected though that even upon our own initiative to link ourselves with this policy process, they never bothered responding to us. We would have only helped but yes then it may only be imposed on us as we are used to see ordinances after ordinances ;))

Abhi ishq kay imtiaan aur bhi hain :)

best wishes

Shahzad

----- Original Message -----

From: Javed Naushahi

To: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com ; bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 6:43 PM

Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Ibtida e Ishq hay rota hay kia

Aagay aagay dekhiey hota hay kia

This is unfortunate!

Computer Society darfted the first IT Policy in 1999, that was adopted by Dr. Atta in MoITT, the documents was made comprehensive after input from +200 IT professionals those participated in formulation of IT Policy.

Action plan for Rs.4/billion was also there, its the implementation that was not done, only Rs. 400/m spent that was given to univerities. Focus shifted to Mobile telephony year 2001 onwards, and all forgot IT goals. $20/billion was spent in Telecom since year 2000, but IT share is less than 10%.

I am afraid due to mutual business interest of Netsol+AOS the document has been kept close to chest. It shall be a public document; discussed publically through a process under Member IT, MoITT. Ownership is with MoITT.

The key of each national IT policy is (electronic) Integration of economy; that include business & industry, Govt, trade, logistics, banking, citizen and other stakeholders. All other items revolves around it.

It is missing.

FBR is loosing RS. 1000/billion every year, and State Bank of Pakistan $10/billion every year in foreign exchange due to non-implementation of IT Policy.

Foreign exchange management was outrourced to Kalia; and indirct FBR Revenue collection to Agility (American company) represented by AOS in Pakistan due to non-implementation of action plan.

Netsol is also NASDAQ listed American company.

IT policy is sandwithed between 2 seths.

Tum baltao keh hum batlain kia.

Lets' join hands.

From: Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@bytesforall.net>
To: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com; bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 4:34:49 AM
Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Dear Fouad,

You are well aware that from the very start of the process by MoITT, how
well we were engaged with this but then were excluded by the Planning
Commission due to obvious reasons that Govt didn't want interventions by the
civil society.

We had been monitoring this at MoITT level and were informed that the
process is in limbo... BUT now suddenly the policy has been developed and
even ready to be announced.

Can not comment about the actual document until have seen it but just to
clarify that we were and we wanted to be engaged with policy development
process.

best wishes
Shahzad

----- Original Message -----
From: "Fouad Bajwa" <fouadbajwa@gmail.com>
To: <pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com>;
<bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Hi Shahzad,

I have similar mixed feelings about this news. The NEWS officially
reported that:
Task force on ICT submits IT policy to planning commission
http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=92327

In response to this yesterday Rabia Gharid of CIO Magazine posted this
message:
http://ciopakistan.com/2009/11/task-force-on-ict-submits-it-policy-document-to-planning-commission-netsol-pr/
there was no reaction from the Pakistan ICT Policy Monitor nor the
other stakeholders in the original ICT Policy process that was
initiated last year but over taken by the Task Force on ICT by Netsol.

I was afraid of this and despite the fact that we continuously
contacted the govt, a policy devised only on one stakeholder's input,
from the private sector only is about to determine the future for the
rest of the stakeholders. This an unacceptable approach dropping out
all the multistakeholders that originally made up the composition of
the national IT Policy redraft multistakeholders group!

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@bytesforall.net>
wrote:
>
>
>
> Just saw this ticker on a news channel... can't remember which one that
> Five Year IT Policy is ready to be announced SOON. Anyone know about this?
> Which policy is this? The one being developed by Planning Commission or
> the one by MoITT?
>
> On a different note, as per Supreme Courts decision since PECO could not
> be passed through national assembly so tomorrow it will not be effective
> anymore. Am I right to understand this?
>
> best wishes
> Shahzad
>
>
>

--
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pakistanictpolicy/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pakistanictpolicy/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
pakistanictpolicy-digest@yahoogroups.com
pakistanictpolicy-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
pakistanictpolicy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#2142

From: Javed Naushahi <jnaushahi@...>
Date: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:49 pm
Subject: Re: Five Year IT Policy Ready???

jnaushahi

I think I alone can prepare the whole document, as well you or Fouad. But consensus is important.

The base of drafting the policy shall be institutional, not indivisual base. The process shall be open and Public; let it be transparent for all.

Simple.

CSP, ISPAK, PASHA, PCA, PSEB, e-Govt. Directorate, MoITT, PCB, PRAL, CRULP, HEC, IEEE, PC, APNA, ISACA, NR3C, PakCert, PTA, FPCCI, NLA and other relevant stakehoders related to IT policy shall have participation on institutional base; so theses institutions could disseminate the draft to their members and get concensensus from their provincial and federal constituncies.

Lets follow basic rule.

The best way forward NOW would be to make the document published at PC/MoITT wesite and ask for comments through ads in national newspapers, funded by Netsol.

Lets do it. Write to concern authorities.

From: Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@...>
To: pakistanictpolicy@yahoogroups.com; bytesforall_readers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 9:08:11 AM
Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Javed Sab... Aali Jah,

Thoroughly enjoyed reading your poetry mixed post :) and yes fully agree with all the pertinent issues you have raised.

We were only hoping that the incoming Member IT with renewed vigor, would take some charge and start involving other stakeholders but then it never happened. Hope remains forever though :)

Abhi ishq kay imtiaan aur bhi hain :)

best wishes

Shahzad

----- Original Message -----

From: Javed Naushahi

To: pakistanictpolicy@ yahoogroups. com ; bytesforall_ readers@yahoogro ups.com

Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 6:43 PM

Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Ibtida e Ishq hay rota hay kia

Aagay aagay dekhiey hota hay kia

This is unfortunate!

Computer Society darfted the first IT Policy in 1999, that was adopted by Dr. Atta in MoITT, the documents was made comprehensive after input from +200 IT professionals those participated in formulation of IT Policy.

Action plan for Rs.4/billion was also there, its the implementation that was not done, only Rs. 400/m spent that was given to univerities. Focus shifted to Mobile telephony year 2001 onwards, and all forgot IT goals. $20/billion was spent in Telecom since year 2000, but IT share is less than 10%.

I am afraid due to mutual business interest of Netsol+AOS the document has been kept close to chest. It shall be a public document; discussed publically through a process under Member IT, MoITT. Ownership is with MoITT.

The key of each national IT policy is (electronic) Integration of economy; that include business & industry, Govt, trade, logistics, banking, citizen and other stakeholders. All other items revolves around it.

It is missing.

FBR is loosing RS. 1000/billion every year, and State Bank of Pakistan $10/billion every year in foreign exchange due to non-implementation of IT Policy.

Foreign exchange management was outrourced to Kalia; and indirct FBR Revenue collection to Agility (American company) represented by AOS in Pakistan due to non-implementation of action plan.

Netsol is also NASDAQ listed American company.

IT policy is sandwithed between 2 seths.

Tum baltao keh hum batlain kia.

Lets' join hands.

From: Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@bytesforall .net>
To: pakistanictpolicy@ yahoogroups. com; bytesforall_ readers@yahoogro ups.com
Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 4:34:49 AM
Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Dear Fouad,

You are well aware that from the very start of the process by MoITT, how
well we were engaged with this but then were excluded by the Planning
Commission due to obvious reasons that Govt didn't want interventions by the
civil society.

We had been monitoring this at MoITT level and were informed that the
process is in limbo... BUT now suddenly the policy has been developed and
even ready to be announced.

Can not comment about the actual document until have seen it but just to
clarify that we were and we wanted to be engaged with policy development
process.

best wishes
Shahzad

----- Original Message -----
From: "Fouad Bajwa" <fouadbajwa@gmail. com>
To: <pakistanictpolicy@ yahoogroups. com>;
<bytesforall_ readers@yahoogro ups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [pakistanictpolicy] Five Year IT Policy Ready???

Hi Shahzad,

I have similar mixed feelings about this news. The NEWS officially
reported that:
Task force on ICT submits IT policy to planning commission
http://www.thenews. com.pk/updates. asp?id=92327

In response to this yesterday Rabia Gharid of CIO Magazine posted this
message:
http://ciopakistan. com/2009/ 11/task-force- on-ict-submits- it-policy- document- to-planning- commission- netsol-pr/
there was no reaction from the Pakistan ICT Policy Monitor nor the
other stakeholders in the original ICT Policy process that was
initiated last year but over taken by the Task Force on ICT by Netsol.

I was afraid of this and despite the fact that we continuously
contacted the govt, a policy devised only on one stakeholder' s input,
from the private sector only is about to determine the future for the
rest of the stakeholders. This an unacceptable approach dropping out
all the multistakeholders that originally made up the composition of
the national IT Policy redraft multistakeholders group!

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Shahzad Ahmad <shahzad@bytesforall .net>
wrote:
>
>
>
> Just saw this ticker on a news channel... can't remember which one that
> Five Year IT Policy is ready to be announced SOON. Anyone know about this?
> Which policy is this? The one being developed by Planning Commission or
> the one by MoITT?
>
> On a different note, as per Supreme Courts decision since PECO could not
> be passed through national assembly so tomorrow it will not be effective
> anymore. Am I right to understand this?
>
> best wishes
> Shahzad
>
>
>

--
Regards.
------------ --------- -----
Fouad Bajwa
Advisor & Researcher
ICT4D & Internet Governance
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
My Blog: Internet's Governance
http://internetsgov ernance.blogspot .com/
Follow my Tweets:
http://twitter. com/fouadbajwa
MAG Interview:
http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=ATVDW1tDZzA

------------ --------- --------- ------

Yahoo! Groups Links

------------ --------- --------- ------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/pakistanic tpolicy/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/pakistanic tpolicy/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
pakistanictpolicy- digest@yahoogrou ps.com
pakistanictpolicy- fullfeatured@ yahoogroups. com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
pakistanictpolicy- unsubscribe@ yahoogroups. com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs. yahoo.com/ info/terms/