[bestbits] NOTE - Call for Nomination: Stakeholder Speakers at the General Assembly High-level Meeting on WSIS+10

Sat Oct 31 03:58:14 EDT 2015

This is what para 3 of part I of the section on roadmap of the
NetMundial outcome document says:

"Stakeholder representatives appointed to multistakeholder Internet
governance processes should be selected through open , democratic, and
transparent processes. Different /*stakeholder groups should self -
manage their processes based on inclusive, publicly known, well defined
and accountable mechanism*/s." (Emphasis added)

On Saturday 31 October 2015 01:19 PM, parminder wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday 31 October 2015 12:47 PM, Ian Peter wrote:
>> Hi Parminder,
>>  
>> While I agree with your analysis,
>
> Ian, I am not sure you are seeing it the way I am. This is not about
> 4-5 of us getting a few minutes from the podium. This is about civil
> society representation will be chosen in the IG space. And if you
> really feel it the way i do, why would you not agree to write as such
> to those in charge of the process.
>
>> I don’t think there is any chance at all that this process will be
>> changed in the short timeframe involved, however strong a protest we
>> make.
>
> As I said, it does not matter if it changes. There is a larger
> structural point here. On the other hand, I am about 90 percent sure
> that if all groups involved in CSCG writes that this is not right, and
> please let us do our own selection they would agree. Civil society
> seems to have forgotten to leverage its legitimacy, and we seem to
> cave in to just about everything, a being beyond us to influence. This
> is not how it should be at all,
>
>> So my own thoughts are that it is probably best to get involved, and
>> from that position make a strong statement that the process is flawed
>> and problematic from our point of view.
>
> Are you saying that the chosen speakers will speak from the podium
> that this process is flawed, and in this way? Please be clear. But if
> we are ready to have our speakers speak about it at the high level
> meeting, why would we not want to write about it to the
> co-facilitators and the concerned UN bureaucracy? Isnt that much
> simpler, and at least have the potential of meaningful impact.
>
>> I also feel that we should be involved because in doing so we are
>> able to correct some excesses from our point of view, but certainly
>> not all.
>
> Again, did not understand. What excesses, and how are they corrected?
>>  
>> However that’s just a personal point of view.  We have just opened a
>> discussion on this in CSCG and decisions may be quite different.
>>  
>> One problem is that CSCG as such cannot nominate. Those who can
>> according to this process are:
>
> These criteria are for those individuals who want to apply to be on
> the multistakeholder selection committee. My proposal is to
> disassociate CS selection from this multistakeholder selection
> process, and ask for CSCG to do it (I find it highly likely that
> they'd agree). So, the issue of the creteria you mention simply does
> not apply to the proposal I am making and seeking your and other
> people's views on.
>
>> Non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the
>> Economic and Social Council • Organizations accredited to the World
>> Summit on the Information Society held in Geneva (2003) and Tunis
>> (2005) • Organizations accredited to the WSIS Forum held from 2011 to
>> 2015 • Organizations with observer status with the United Nations
>> Conference on Trade and Development • Attendees of the UNESCO WSIS+10
>> - ICT4D Conference or the UNESCO WSIS - Connecting the Dots
>> Conference • Organizations accredited to the Financing for
>> Development (FFD) process • Organizations accredited to the United
>> Nations Sustainable Development Summit 2015 • Organizations already
>> accredited to the WSIS+10 process (July and October meetings)
>>  
>> So if CSCG as such is involved, it will have to be with our
>> nominations as representatives of civil society organisations who do
>> fit one at least of the above criteria.
>
>  I am not asking for the CSCG to get involved with this
> multistakeholder selection process. On the contrary, I am asking for
> us to disassociate from it.
>
>>  
>> Another problem is that the time frame for selecting speakers is
>> roughly that of IGF – and with a 15 hour estimated commitment it may
>> not be easy to find people able to represent us. I believe that if we
>> are involved we should try to fill both civil society slots on the
>> selection panel. But that will have to be as two separate nominations
>> (backed by CSCG) from different CS groups.
>
> Again, you are speaking of CSCG getting involved with the current
> process, which is fundamentally different from my proposal to ask for
> CS nominations to be taken off the multistakeholder process, and be
> taken over by CSCG itself. Same about the rest of your email below.
>
>
> Ian, lets look at it in two parts. Do the involved CS groups agree
> that other stakeholders  - big business, gov, ICANN/ ISOC - should not
> be involved in selection of its reps? Yes or no. If yes, then let us
> that put down in a letter. I am happy to fight the case, but if we
> have such a position and want to fight the case. We cannot keep citing
> expediency for just everything. But if we are ok with such a process,
> that is a different matter, and let different groups and individuals
> give their views... Their has to be some limit to - we agree it is
> wrong, but....
>
> parminder
>
>>  
>> And if we do nominate representatives on the selection panel, we have
>> to do so this week.
>>  
>> And if I may add a further factor – I will be stepping down as the
>> Independent Chair of CSCG shortly, as my term expires soon. I will
>> not be standing again, as various factors are making it difficult for
>> me to maintain an active involvement in these forums; and I think it
>> is time for one of our very talented (and younger) members to take
>> over.  CSCG is currently drafting an EOI to seek a new independent
>> Chair, with the aim of opening that process before IGF so that people
>> get a chance to discuss it while many are present in Brazil. So the
>> replacement process hopefully will complete by the end of this year.
>>  
>> So in these circumstances – it would be good to hear from anyone who
>> has an interest in working with CSCG as part of this particular
>> process; I don’t necessarily want to be involved if we have good reps
>> able to consult with CSCG members. If anyone is interested in this
>> and wants to contact me privately to assist in this way,  I would be
>> happy to discuss further and approach CSCG as regards their involvement.
>>  
>> Thanks for opening up a discussion on this.
>>  
>> Ian Peter
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> *From:* parminder <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>
>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 31, 2015 3:32 PM
>> *To:* bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] NOTE - Call for Nomination: Stakeholder
>> Speakers at the General Assembly High-level Meeting on WSIS+10
>>  
>> Please see the below announcement.
>>
>> It seems that there is a strong effort to institutionalise a system
>> of civil society reps for speaker roles, but perhaps later also for
>> more substantive roles, being selected by multistakeholder
>> committees, meaning that big business and technical community gets a
>> veto over civil society rep selection. (Do remember here that
>> 'technical community' here is not that odd free and open software
>> group volunteering their time in supporting government schools or the
>> such. This term is accepted in the IG world now to denote those who
>> work for and represent organisations engaged with technical
>> governance of the Internet, and thus represent a governance status
>> quo group. The semantic confusion about the term, as being people
>> with technical capacities, is deliberate in order to utilise a
>> certain legitimacy for what is a power based governance system.)
>>
>> The structural problem with such a process should be obvious.
>>
>> This is not acceptable for me, my organisation and the networks that
>> I work with. Civil society has traditionally been fiercely protective
>> of its independence, which includes the right to choose its own
>> nominees (for instance, any efforts at national govs 'clearing' civil
>> society reps from their countries has been strongly resisted at the
>> UN and other global governance levels).  I think we need to write
>> back to those responsible for this process that , thanks but no
>> thanks, you tell us how many CS sepakers you want and we have a
>> process of selection for CS reps and we will deliver the names by the
>> date you want.
>>
>> May I appeal to Ian and the CSCG to frame and send such a letter to
>> WSIS process co-facilitators, and the concerned UN bureaucracy, at
>> the earliest. Before these mentioned deadlines pass.
>>
>> Meanwhile, let me give some background on this....
>>
>> Just Net Coalition did write a letter addressed to the
>> co-facilitators against such a process of big business sitting over
>> decisions on CS reps. It seems to have had no effect.
>>
>> A few years back, there was an attempt by a certain group in the IGF
>> MAG, led by the then Exec Director of the IGF, Markus Kummer, to
>> institute a method of selections of non gov MAG members by a
>> committee of older non gov MAG members. I was able to attend MAG
>> meetings in those days as a Special Advisor to the chair. I opposed
>> such a process of CS nominee selection by a committee that included
>> big business and technical community  (read the ICANN/ ISOC system).
>> I was able to get the support of a few CS MAG members in the room,
>> and I distinctly remember Graciala, Katitza, and Foaud in this
>> regard, and perhaps a person or two more whose names may have dropped
>> from my memory (my apologies).... And because of the CS opposition
>> this problematic move had to be abandoned.  Now it seems to be coming
>> back from another door, and we need to stand up against it once again.
>>
>> Again, we have very little turnaround time here.
>>
>> parminder
>>
>> On Friday 30 October 2015 08:04 PM, Carolina Rossini wrote:
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: *NGO News* <ngonews at un.org <mailto:ngonews at un.org>>
>>> Date: Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:14 AM
>>> Subject: [NGO News:] Call for Nomination: Stakeholder Speakers at
>>> the General Assembly High-level Meeting on WSIS+10
>>> To: crossini at publicknowledge.org <mailto:crossini at publicknowledge.org>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Deadlines:            *
>>>
>>> *8 November 2015: Apply for Selection Committee*
>>>
>>> *12 November 2015: Apply for Speaking Roles*
>>>
>>> *The General Assembly High-level Meeting on the overall review of
>>> the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the
>>> Information Society will take place on 15-16 December 2015 at the UN
>>> Headquarters in New York.*
>>>
>>> This high-level meeting will provide an opportunity for in-depth
>>> discussions on important issues in the implementation of the WSIS
>>> outcomes, including the progress, gaps and challenges, as well as
>>> areas for future actions.
>>>
>>> *To apply to speak at the High-level Meeting, please complete the
>>> form available here
>>> <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ffRSw8C5UGYRKrzdpCiWnyc2EMVTbmZ1SVGNnhs0FcQ/viewform>*.
>>> Applications will be accepted from *30 October to* *12 November 2015*.
>>>
>>> *A Selection Committee will be established* in order to ensure broad
>>> and inclusive participation of stakeholders in the high-level
>>> meeting. Applications to the Selection Committee will be accepted
>>> from *30 October to 8 November 2015*. To learn more about the
>>> Selection Committee, please see the Terms of Reference by clicking
>>> on this link
>>> <http://csonet.org/content/documents/WSIS+10_ToR_Steering_Committee.pdf>.
>>> *To apply to participate in the stakeholder Selection Committee,
>>> please complete the form available **here*
>>> <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pzCRKLri16XUMNYNA9QECFnhCrO9Ub7ex0Ho2vdYp2k/viewform>*.*
>>>
>>> *Background*
>>>
>>> In December of 2003, the world came together in Geneva at the World
>>> Summit on Information Society (WSIS) to declare a "common desire and
>>> commitment to build a people-centred, inclusive and
>>> development-oriented Information Society," and ushered in an era of
>>> harnessing the power of information and communication technology to
>>> contribute to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals
>>> (MDGs). The resulting Geneva Plan of Action established targets and
>>> the eleven action lines, which guide development in specific areas.
>>>
>>> The second phase of WSIS, conducted in Tunis in 2005, built upon the
>>> achievements of the Geneva Plan, with the resulting Tunis Agenda
>>> addressing additional issues, such as financing and internet
>>> governance. Paragraph 111 of the Tunis Agenda, endorsed by the
>>> General Assembly in resolution 60/252, requested the General
>>> Assembly to undertake the overall review of the implementation of
>>> the outcomes of WSIS in 2015.  In response, the General Assembly in
>>> resolution 68/302, decided that the overall review will be concluded
>>> by a two-day high-level meeting of the General Assembly, to be
>>> preceded by an intergovernmental process that also takes into
>>> account inputs from all relevant stakeholders of WSIS.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  
>>> -- 
>>>  
>>> /Carolina Rossini /
>>> /Vice President, International Policy and Strategy
>>> /
>>> *Public Knowledge*
>>> _http://www.publicknowledge.org/_
>>> + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
>>>
>>>  
>>> -- 
>>>  
>>> /Carolina Rossini /
>>> /Vice President, International Policy/
>>> *Public Knowledge*
>>> _http://www.publicknowledge.org/_
>>> + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
>>>  
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20151031/1c8df916/attachment.htm>