Best Bits: Agenda Organization Options

[Jeremy Malcolm]

On 09/09/2012, at 10:22 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> I prefer that we keep to the existing draft schedule, although Bills suggestion of doing away with panels etc can be considered.

Sure, and in any case they won't be IGF-style panels as such, they are just people whom the moderator can call on to lead the discussion.

> I am also unsure about the practicality of bringing out some kind of a draft on IG principles from the meeting.

I think someone else may reply on this point, but actually the IG principles have had a long genesis.  Let me quote from the closing civil society statement at last year's IGF which I delivered (full statement at http://www.igfwatch.org/discussion-board/my-closing-session-statement-at-the-nairobi-igf):

> One of the recent developments in Internet governance most remarked upon at this meeting has been the flourishing of statements of principles of Internet governance from various stakeholders, including governments and intergovernmental organisations. This is a welcome development, because it demonstrates that those stakeholders understand the value of soft governance of the Internet, which the IGF also exemplifies. Several of the stakeholders who have developed statements of principles have also placed them before this meeting of the IGF for discussion. This is another welcome step, because it shows their commitment to developing policy through multi-stakeholder consultation, and the IGF is the perfect place for this.
> 
> Continuing this process, the next step that many in civil society would like to see is for the IGF to be used as a venue for each of the stakeholders to contribute these statements of principles, to a process by which we draw out common elements, and build consensus, towards the development of a multi-stakeholder framework of principles which we can all own together. If such a joint statement of principles could be produced during the current term of the IGF's mandate, this would have far more weight and legitimacy than any of the individual statements could ever hope to possess on their own. It would also establish beyond question the IGF's ability to contribute tangible and lasting outcomes for the guidance of policy makers.
> 
> On the part of the Internet Governance Caucus, we intend to participate in the development of a set of principles for civil society, using an open and transparent process, as our input into the process of developing a common framework of principles. We hope to present this civil society statement of principles at the next meeting of the IGF and at other Internet governance meetings in the meantime.
> 


As I understand, Wolfgang proposes that we could use the language that he and some others of you were already involved with drafting at the Council of Europe as a starting point (scroll down):

https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1835773

-- 
Dr Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Policy Officer
Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers
Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599

Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission

@Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20120910/f669b0d1/attachment.htm>