[bestbits] MAG nomination process via Best Bits

[Jeremy Malcolm]

On 15 Nov 2013, at 2:25 pm, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> I dont see the need for BB to get into making recs for MAG membership when IGC seems to do a good - and much better insitutionalised - way of doing. If the fear is that some people may not be on the IGC - which i not too sure of - BB can forward nomination to the IGC process.
> 
> However, if BB just insists on having its own MAG nominaiton process, I oppose steering committee on its own making the selections (a post facto confirmation by the list - the process of which I could not understand, is of no use bec no one from the list is going to object to any name which is listed as selected by the steering committee) .... This does not go with BB's platform image projection.... and in any case does not look like a good process to follow.

The steering committee would not be making selections, just suggestions to the main list.  But in this case I don't think that it will be necessary to do even that, because we've only received one nomination so far, so we will doubtless be suggesting the list approve their inclusion by default.  (A good reason for the low interest may be that the IGF MAG appointment is probably not the most important issue that we face right now - there are more important things to be addressing with the Brazil conference, the UN on surveillance, the TPP IP chapter, etc.)

You are right that there are definitely some participants in Best Bits who are not, and don't want to be, members of the IGC, and I'm not sure that telling such people to nominate through the IGC is the right answer, because the IGC nomcom would not have as much reason to select other civil society representatives who are not involved with the IGC.  Having said that, in this instance the chair of the IGC nomcom has suggested that we could also forward our nominees to the IGC nomcom for consideration, so we can do exactly what you have suggested, whilst maintaining our own process too.

Note that there are other groups too that are doing their own nominations, with whom we've been discussing and there's been a general desire to try for a joint process this year.  If the IGC nomcom (which, as you say, has the least flexible procedures) is able to incorporate the other groups' nominations, that would be one way of doing it.  If not, then another way would be forwarding one message to UNOG with several different slates of candidates, along with explanations of who chose them and what procedures they used to do so.

This is a way of testing the waters for the kind of unified civil society nomination process that we will need soon for purposes such as the Brazil summit... oops, conference.

So we are trying this and will see how it goes.  In terms of timing, we would have to go back to the main list with the nominee/s for approval this week, as that is the deadline by which the IGC nomcom will be accepting nominations.  So we are seeking any further nominations to steering at lists.bestbits.net or this list by say 20 November.

-- 
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 | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational

Read our email confidentiality notice. 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/20131117/3abcf7b8/attachment.htm>