[bestbits] MAG nomination process via Best Bits

[Jeremy Malcolm]

With apologies for the delay in posting about this (due to travel and
other deadlines), this is to note that if you are interested in
volunteering as a civil society representative on the IGF
Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) in the coming year, you may have
heard that nominations are being taken until 1 December.  You can
self-nominate, but there is some advantage to be had in having your
nomination forwarded and supported by other civil society groups.  There
are a number of choice in that regard, and for those of you who have
closer ties to the Internet Governance Caucus, Diplo or the Internet
Rights and Principles Coalition for example, you may want to explore
those options.

Otherwise, Best Bits has also been developing a draft process for
nominating representatives to external groups, which may suit those who
aren't primarily associated with the other civil society groups or
networks.  The process is still open for discussion on the procedure
wiki at http://bestbits.net/wiki/main/procedures/.  The process, which
is very loose compared to the IGC's more formal procedure, simply
provides as follows:

  * The steering committee shall call for expressions of interest on the
    main list.
  * Selection criteria will be decided on a case-by-case basis and
    will be shared when the steering committee publicises the call, but
    at a very minimum geographical diversity (if not balance) and gender
    balance should be taken into account.
  * The steering committee will select a proposed slate of nominees,
    taking into account those who expressed interest.
  * The proposed nominees will be posted back to the main list and
    approved by consensus.

Although the process was mentioned in Bali, we didn't have time to
discuss it in detail.  I feel, personally, that we should at least test
it out.  If it doesn't work, then there is another option - see below -
which involves working with other civil society networks to jointly
collaborate on putting forward slates of nominees.  But the idea behind
having a Best Bits procedure as that it provides a simpler way for us
all to get behind and amplify the efforts of those who wish to serve
civil society in an Internet governance committee or forum.  The
steering committee's role is meant to be very light, just to ensure balance.

In the longer term, an idea being explored is to have an umbrella
process among the whole of civil society, which hasn't existed since the
WSIS days.  Hopefully that might be in place by the time we need to add
or replace representatives to the I* coalition/dialogue, and when
nominating various representatives for the Brazil summit.  In that
regard, I have suggested a draft process,[0] which we can go on to
discuss on whatever list ends up being used for the summit discussion
(this needs to be finally resolved, and Deborah will post about the
options soon.  My two cents: post to whichever list you prefer).

As a step towards that, we could ask the IGC to include our nominees in
their slate also, though under the IGC charter the names would require
further consideration by their nominating committee... so we should also
submit list of names separately.  (If you have views on this, please
feel free to express them.)

Since some people seem unsure who the interim steering committee are, a
reminder that it is Andrew Puddephatt (Global Partners), Anja Kovacs
(Internet and Democracy Project), Deborah Brown (Access), myself
(Consumers International), Joana Varon Ferraz (FGV/CTS), Marianne
Franklin (individual/IRP coalition), Nnenna (World Wide Web Foundation)
and Valeria Betancourt (APC).  We have a procedure for choosing a new
steering committee, and that also needs to be tested out - though a
general preference expressed by a number of people in Bali was that we
should not rush into this, when it could be useful to have continuity at
least over the next few months leading to the Brazil summit.  Perhaps
after the interim steering committee has been in place for one year, it
may be a good time to renew it - just in my personal opinion.

So, I've asked the rest of the steering committee to help come up with
some suggestions for criteria, and we'll follow up with those soon.
 Meanwhile, if you are interested in being included in a Best Bits
slate, you can email steering at lists.bestbits.net.  Note, this doesn't
mean you can't (also) self-nominate, or nominate through the IGC or
another process.

[0] • Develop criteria for civil society networks that could form a
loose peak body.
• Outreach to the relevant networks to agree to form that peak body,
initially with one representative each (chosen per their own procedures).
• Peak body suggests a list of criteria for nominations (including
transparency and accountability requirements), which their constituents
approve.
• Members of peak body use their own network's procedures to put its
nominees into a shortlist.
• Peak body applies those criteria to develop a joint final list of
nominees.

-- 

*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

Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement knowledge
hub |http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone

@Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/> | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
<http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

*WARNING*: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly
recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For
instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131112/f872ae2a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 263 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131112/f872ae2a/attachment.sig>