[governance] APC - Forum draft?

[Gurstein, Michael]

On a very quick first glance I think this is excellent! And possibly a
model for the Global Alliance as well?

MG

-----Original Message-----
From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org
[mailto:governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Adam Peake
Sent: November 10, 2005 2:33 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] APC - Forum draft?


Please see below.  Thanks to APC, I hope we can work with this.

I think there may be changes some of you might like to make, but it 
is close to many of the ideas we have been discussing.

Looking forward to your comments,

Adam



APC November 2005.

1. Internet Governance Forum

APC recommends  that the UN Secretary General to initiate a forum 
that incorporates the Geneva principles for significant 
multi-stakeholder participation. We recommend that the forum not be 
anchored in any existing specialised international organisation, but 
rather be organised as a legally free-standing entity. Stakeholders 
from all sectors must be able to participate in such a forum as peers.


* Scope and Function

We recommend that the forum provide the following functions:

a.  inclusive dialogue, with a differentiated architecture allowing 
for peer-level interaction.

b.  comparative, cross-sectoral analysis of governance mechanisms, 
with an eye toward "lessons learned" and best practices that could 
inform individual and collective institutional improvements

c.  assessment and monitoring of horizontal issues applicable to all 
internet governance arrangements, e.g. the promotion of transparency, 
accountability, inclusion, and other guidelines for "good 
governance," such as the WSIS principles;

d. identification of weaknesses and gaps in existing governance 
mechanisms, especially multidimensional issues that do not fall 
neatly within the scope of any existing body;

e.  efforts to promote enhanced coordination among existing governing
bodies

f.  provide a clearing house for coordination and resource 
mobilization to supporting meaningful developing country 
participation and capacity building;

g.  release recommendations, best practices, proposals and other 
documents on the various internet governance issues.

h.  develop partnerships with academic and research institutions to 
access knowledge resources and expertise on a regular basis. These 
partnerships should seek to reflect geographic balance and cultural 
diversity and promote cooperation among all regions.

We recommend that operations are designed in such a way that physical 
attendance is not strictly required and disadvantaged stakeholders 
(developing countries, civil society organisations, individuals) are 
proactively supported.

We recommend the forum have clear organisation and decision-making 
procedures. It is also important that the structure that will be 
given to the forum is able to produce practical results.

The forum will not have a mandate to negotiate hard instruments like 
treaties or contracts. However, in very exceptional circumstances 
when all stakeholders agree that more formal arrangements are 
desirable, the forum could request an appropriate international 
organisation to negotiate such instruments. The forum focuses on the 
development of soft law instruments such as recommendations, 
guidelines, declarations, etc. in addition, the scope of the work of 
the Forum should address the application of existing international 
human rights instruments in the area of internet governance and 
related public policy.

In addition, the scope of the work of the Forum should address the 
application of existing international human rights instruments in the 
area of internet governance and related public policy.

In the context of the evolving public and technical policy landscape 
of the internet there will be a need to concretise binding 
international agreements that relate to ensuring that nothing in 
existing or emerging internet governance and related public policy 
development impair, restrict, or contradict human rights, as they are 
spelled out in the UDHR and international law. The forum should 
monitor this evolving landscape with a view to the initiation of a 
process to concretise such international agreements.


* Anchorage and legal identity

We propose that initially the Forum NOT be anchored in any existing 
international organisation.

We propose that the Forum be constituted as an independent 
international organisation incorporated under national law in any 
country that provides for the legal establishment of international 
not-for-profit institutions.

We propose that the process of convening and formally constituting 
the Forum, as a free-standing legal entity, take place under the 
oversight of the Secretary General of the UN.


* Constituting the membership

We propose the following steps, under the oversight of the SG of the UN:

1. Establish transparent membership criteria that is consistent with:

a.  The Geneva Principles on participation from multiple stakeholder 
groups (paragraph 48 of the WSIS Declaration of Principles)
b.  The technical, legal, public policy and other areas of expertise 
required to respond to the range of issues related to the BROAD 
definition of internet governance
c.  Regional and linguistic diversity and the disparities that exist 
in relation to economic development and access to the information 
society, within countries and between countries

2. Convene a public nomination process that is open to:

a.  Governments
b.  Business entities
c.  The technical community
d.  Academic and educational institutions
e.  Civil society organisations
f.  Community based organisations and grassroots communities
g.  At large committees of individual users, (or 'netizens'). These 
could either be formed on a regional basis or some other basis, e.g. 
subject matter affinity.


* Structure and functioning

We endorse paragraph 46 of the WGIG report that emphasizes a 
lightweight support structure.

Coordination of the work of the Forum can initially be provided by a 
Forum Formation Team supported by a small secretariat. The Team could 
consist of eight members made up of two each from the three WSIS 
sectors -- governments, private sector and civil society and two from 
the community of actors involved in technical aspects of internet 
development and management.  One of the two in each sector should be 
from a developing country. The Team could have a one year 
non-renewable mandate to work with the secretariat to build the 
Forum. The Forum should be established within four months of the 
Tunis summit.

The Team's mandate could include:

  -  Drafting the member structure
  -  Developing an operational budget
  -  Resource mobilisation
  -  Identifying scope of work and mission of the Forum
  -  Calling on people to populate sub-groups so that work could begin 
on specific issues while the Forum's membership and structure is 
being finalised

Members of the Forum can self-organise into thematic working groups 
on an as needed basis to respond to both existing and emerging 
internet governance and public policy challenges.

Meetings of the Forum:

Meetings of the Forum and thematic working groups can take place 
face-to-face and online.

An annual meeting should take place, face to face, and be combined 
with a public event that maximizes sharing of information, learning 
and good practice. The venue should rotate.

Access to the work of the Forum, and its thematic working groups, 
should be facilitated by online tools for example as is done by the 
IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force).

Rotational and thematic meetings:

In order to avoid creating a large supporting structure to organize 
meetings, the Forum could work with existing organisations to arrange 
meetings.  Depending on the issue being discussed and on a rotational 
basis for yearly meetings, the work of the Forum could be hosted by 
the participating organisations, working in pairs, e.g.  UNESCO and 
ITU, OECD and a regional African entity like NEPAD's eAfrica 
Commission,  W3C and IDRC or GKP.  It should be understood that this 
would not subordinate the agenda of the Forum to the hosting 
organisation, but rather, would constitute a donation in kind to the 
forum.  The notion of donation in kind to the forum could extend 
beyond meeting organisation to other organisational requirements, 
e.g. office arrangements for the secretariat or printing costs.

END
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance