[bestbits] Civil Society MAG Appointments - Call for comments

[William Drake]

Hi

Sorry for cross-posting but I’m copying IGC as if memory serves my nomination was endorsed there.

FWIW, I have now served for three years on the MAG and want to rotate off in the next cycle. There are other CS people who’ve worked hard on pushing boulders up hill who will also be departing, but I leave it to them to state this.

Civil society desperately needs to have serious and strategically oriented representatives who are committed to advancing CS’s objectives in an environment where NETmundial has endorsed the IGF strengthening we’d long advocated but conservative proponents of a staid status quo are quite good at process bending.  CS participants need to work together, and to actively coordinate with MAG members from other stakeholder groups that may be in agreement on particular issues.  Despite the efforts of a few, this frequently has not been achieved in recent years. So I really hope some dedicated people will be nominated.

To the selection criteria below you might want to add having a clear understanding of a) civil society concerns and objectives, and b) the strategic objectives and behavior of other stakeholders represented on the MAG, and an ability to respond to these quickly and effectively as needed.

If there’s a joint CSCG submission, you might want to note that the coalitions that have worked on IG for years and contributed heavily to building the IGF remain concerned about their frequent inability to get the qualified people they nominate onto the MAG, with the result that CS has often been ineffectively represented.  This has had significant consequences for not only CS but by extension the IGF itself.  These concerns are even sharper now in light of the NETmundial mandate, so insist that people selected be involved in CS work and networks and be seriously committed to engagement, and that the names you’re forwarding meet these criteria.  See what happens when this goes into the black box at DESA.

Best,

Bill

On Sep 12, 2014, at 8:56 PM, jmalcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:

> Folks, this is a lengthy message requesting your feedback as regards Internet Governance Forum Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) nominations and the role that the Internet Governance Civil Society Co ordination Group (CSCG) might play.
> 
> The history that led to this has been that, in the past various, civil society groups have nominated separately, with the result being that the Secretariat made its own decisions, including in some cases people with no active involvement with the civil society groups. Last year for the first time we were able to achieve a degree of cross-endorsements between our groups, but this was still confusing to the IGF Secretariat. To remedy this, we are looking this year for the first time to have a more comprehensive civil-society endorsement process for candidates.
> 
> In this respect, we expect to issue a call for candidates next Thursday (September 18). In the meantime, as we finalise this approach, your comments are sought on the following.
> 
> TIMETABLE
> 
> The draft timetable is as follows. Bear in mind that each coalition member will be calling for its own nominations which will be collated with others at a later stage
> 
>    Thurs, Sep 18 - release call for nominations and final selection criteria
>    Tues, September 30 - close of nominations
>    October 1-3 - collation of nominations and shortlisting from various coalitions
>    October 4- 14 - completion of selections and publication of names to lists
>    October 16 - forwarding names to IGF Secretariat.
> 
> Your comments on this are welcome.
> 
> PROCEDURES
> 
> The draft procedures follow. These are still being refined within CSCG, but your input is welcome.
> 
> The role of CSCG is to ensure a co-ordinated civil society response and conduit when it comes to making civil society appointments to outside bodies.
> 
> The following is the procedure which CSCG follows when a request for civil society appointments is received.
> 
> 1.  CSCG may be involved in nominations when requested to do so by either one of its members or by an outside organisation requesting CS involvement. When such a request is received, CSCG will clarify what has been requested and, in a case where CS already has representation, consult with existing representatives in clarifying the involvement required.
> 
> 2.  CSCG will not be involved in any appointments of CS representatives if more than 35% of its coalition members determine not to be involved in the process, or where the number with a clear determination to be involved does not exceed those expressing a wish not to be involved. (Others may have a neutral or undecided stance) Where coalition members choose not to be involved and a decision to proceed is made, their decision to do so will be announced (if they so wish) as part of any announcement of chosen representatives. The decision to be involved or not is the primary responsibility of each constituency.
> 
> 3.  Any CSCG member who wishes to be eligible for selection as part of any process must announce that intention before a call for candidates is announced, and may nominate another representative of their coalition to take their place on the Nomcom.
> 
> 4.  CSCG as a whole will determine selection criteria for any appointments and announce them as part of a call for candidates.
> 
> 5.  CSCG will determine and manage a timetable for the process.
> 
> 6.  A separate CSCG mailing list will be established for each nomination process.
> 
> 7.  Unless otherwise determined by CSCG members, each coalition will issue its own call for candidates, and forward appropriate names to CSCG at the nominated close of nominations. Coalitions are at liberty to shortlist their own candidates and only submit appropriate names, or to forward all names received
> 
> 8.  Where time permits and as appropriate, candidates may be asked to address selection criteria in their nominations.
> 
> 9.  The CSCG Nomcom will consist of all voting members and the non voting chair, with the exception of representatives of coalitions who choose not to participate in a particular process.
> 
> 10.  The Nomcom in making its decisions should determine appropriate procedures to arrive at a final decision. But unless circumstances suggest otherwise, it is suggested that selection should begin with a shortlisting process, which will assist in identifying most favoured candidates and which candidates should be examined more closely. Following from shortlisting, which is a guide only and not an indication of which candidates should be selected, Â Nomcom members will arrive at the final candidates list, using on line exchanges and if necessary conference linkups to determine the final slates.
> 
> 11.  All members of the Nomcom are required to consider the interests of civil society as a whole, and not just their own coalition, in determining appropriate representatives
> 
> 12.  All Nomcoms will take into account geographic and gender balance in determining their final selections, while considering also the need for the breadth of viewpoints/worldviews represented within civil society to be represented. Â While realising that complete balance will not be able to be achieved in every individual instance. CSCG members are requested to take into account any such deficits in balances in previous CSCG decisions in making selections, with an objective of achieving balance over a period of time which may not be achievable in every particular case.
> 
> 13.  The records of each Nomcom will be destroyed six months after the process is completed.
> 
> 
> 
> SELECTION CRITERIA
> 
> The following are suggested selection criteria for MAG for your comments (see also comments above re achieving balance across the slate of candidates)
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  Past record of active engagement as part of civil society groups working on internet governance issues
> 
> 2.  Consultative style
> 
> 3.  Previous attendee at IGF
> 
> 4.  Able to work constructively with other stakeholder groups
> 
> 
> 
> A period for comments and suggestions is now open. A call for candidates will be issued on Thursday, September 18.
> 
> Ian Peter
> 
> (Independent Chair, CSCG)
> 
> 
> 
> CSCG members are:
> 
> Association for Progressive Communications,  represented by Chat Garcia Ramilo, Deputy Executive Director
> 
> Best Bits, represented by Jeremy Malcolm, Steering Committee member
> 
> Civicus, represented by Mandeep Tiwana, Head of Policy and Research
> 
> Diplo Foundation,  represented by Ginger (Virginia) Paque,  Internet Governance Programmes
> 
> Just Net Coalition, represented by Norbert Bollow, Co-convenor
> 
> Internet Governance Caucus, represented by Dr Mawaki Chango, Co-Coordinator
> 
> The Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group, (NCSG) represented by Robin Gross, NCSG Executive Committee
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

***********************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
  Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
  University of Zurich, Switzerland
Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, 
  ICANN, www.ncuc.org
william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists),
  www.williamdrake.org
***********************************************