[governance] malta/Composition and Organisation of the Internet Governance Forum

[Robert Guerra]

here are my notes from the session this morning

--


Composition and Organization of the Internet Governance Forum

Markus Kummer:

- OECD as a possible model for the IGF

- what might be a common ground - there is a srong wish among ng  
actors that the forum, should be very open, that all relevant actors  
can participate and that procedural issues don't bog it down

- wgig consultation process should be the model ( also mentioned by  
Canada in it's reply to the questionnaire)

- that stake-holders have an equal footing with governments

- the Tunis agenda mentions a bureau. this is slightly confusing as  
it seems to refer to a secretariat in the common sense. Bureau has a  
connotation that's bureaucratic. A more novel approach would be to  
call it a "program committee" instead, as its role is to prepare the  
next meeting.

- the first meeting should be kicked off with a positive agenda. For  
example, an issue that is not contra-versional - ie. spam & multilingual

- format of the issue: more conducive to have focused discussion on a  
given issue. 1-2 priority issues to be dealt in depth.Also need a  
slot for a general discussion

- Greeks have proposed that the meeting is "short & snappy". 2-3  
meeting maximum, would carry a good participation.

- Format; should not follow a plenary format, but instead a more  
dynamic and interactive exchange.

- there is a general mood to be "positive" about the IGF. Business &  
CS, and govts see it as positive. Govts don't see it as a platform to  
engage in a constructive dialogue.


Comments from the floor:

Greek Amb: Can you expand your comments on the program committee.

Kummer:

-  we need such a body. PC would be very useful to prepare a meeting.  
Perhaps after next

- the program committee should be multi-stakeholder. members of PC  
would be envisioned to have an open consultation with their  
constituency, to get ideas and suggestions.

- membership of the PC would be recommended after consultation with  
the various stakeholder groups.

- the mandate is quite "fuzzy"

Question:

- worried about the participation of developing countries on the IGF

Kummer:

- we all share this concern. there are donors that are willing to  
make a contribution to help developing countries. but it isn't that  
easy. you need a process to evaluate candidates for fellowships
- will have to use ICTs - video conference and other tools - to  
facilitate remote participation. Discussion could also be done via  
proxies of persons in the room.

Greek:

- understand the PC to provide the intellectual thrust. but who will  
provide the logistical support. Will there be a secretarait. there  
are many things that need to be clarified

Kummer:

- if PC is a good way to proceed, then it will possible. CBBI has  
questions about having a secretarait.
- let's go to the consultations next week and see
- the secretarait could provide the support for the program committee

Question:

- any views on where the meetings should be held. should they be in  
one permanent place or in alternate venues - for example in  
developing countries.

Kummer:

- Greece kicked it off proposing a first venue. However you can't  
force a country to be a host. If there isn't a permanent seat, then  
the natural seat would be Geneva.

- However once it gets settled, then it would be good to have  
geographical balance and move meetings to developping countries.

Peter Serracino Inglott, former Rector of the University of Malta

have been involved in various constitutional exercises, including the  
european constitution. Also the commonwealth attempts for constitutions.

As networks - not produce a constitution of the type onf the us or  
intl organizations, but should provide a self-description. it should  
be a unique description of a network

An obvious starting point, the internet - the network of networks -  
should not have a formal description.

- decision making power should be as distributed as possible
- need a version of the principle of subsidarity. Which is closer to  
the network structure.
- decision taking powers should be located where the flow of  
information, the relevant flow of information is more intense. This  
gives us a general principle of governance that has the kind of self- 
justifying validity.

other principles, using the pattern for the development of human rights

- right to existence & life: would mean efficiency needs to be the  
overriding principle.

- recognition that no existence is absolute. only existence in a  
sytem of relationships. justice  exercised between the different parts.

  3 parts : the nodes (ideally of equal status).
-subject to sustainability
- the most open flow possible between the nodes
- openness to communication needs to be subject to checks & balance  
to ensure its sustainability and existence
- limits : limits are produced by the very act of declaring what it  
is. pragmatic considerations

- one final consideration :  comparison between internet and common  
heritage of mankind.

Need to distinguish between the technical enterprise and the  
authority for distributing the benefits (which would reflect the  
developing world).

If the internet is a common heritage for mankind (comes from  
resources of the seabed ).

Questions:

- regarding the theoretical model. The IGF will be introduced into an  
already existing system.
- regarding efficiency : it is problematic because basing only on  
efficiency may not be the most legitimate one.

the most important aspect, in my view, is the importance of the lines  
of communication.

Answer:

- greatest sympathy with what just said. As there already is a system  
is the reason i mentioned efficiency .


Professor Ang Peng Hwa, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Title: a very modest proposal

what is the problem to solve ? who can help us address this mandate.

Essential elements:

1. a secretariat
2. advisory bodies - open and inclusive. Would be self-organizing

3. information mechanism
4. financial mechanism

- proposal that IGF run the .INT registry and use income from that  
revenue stream to help fund the forum . it's currently free, so it  
would be logically.


Meetings:

- forum might be around other meetings
- presence of developing countries essential
- no votes
- don't call it a bureau, as they will be called bureaucrats
- twice yearly meeting because internet time is faster, and more  
importantly - to build trust among the participants. meeting more  
than once a year is essential.


Question -

- In terms of models, would like to point out the UN forum on  
forests : it now has a multi-stakeholder dialogue and collaborative  
dialogue present

Question -

- Finance related question.

Question -

- See the IGF not as a forum, but as an ongoing structured dialogue.  
would not see it as one meeting and prepare for it.
- The forum should be part of the process .
- there should also be a channel where new things could be discussed.

Question -

- an important decision would be set the agenda of the first meeting  
and NOT  have it as an ongoing never ending UN process/meeting.

Question -

- Comments on looking @  the UN permanent forum on indigenous peoples.

Ayesha Hassan


- need national level consultations as well
- use of rules of procedure for intergovernmental organizations would  
not be appropriate. would recommend procedure used in WGIG

- need translation. can be an obstacle, but much needed for true  
engagement of all stakeholders

Questions:

- what will be the exact link for the UN?
- If you have UN link then you need rules of procedure. your comments.

The business community sees the forum as an outcome of a UN process,  
as a forum for discussion.
- this is a forum for discussion. The WSIS was a negotiation and had  
it's rules, this is a forum for discussion - which is more open and  
flexible.

Karen Banks

- forum should be seen as a networked decentralized process.
- the experience of the process, spirit and innovation which existed  
in the WGIG was a good one.
- the forum success : has to motivate and engage all stake-holders.  
needs to outreach and network.
- there should be a clear framework to concretizing the developing  
country focus.

- proposed that the issue of affordable internet access be a first  
issue to be discussed.

- civil society is much more diverse,and harder to consult. CS is  
firmly behind the IGF.

- Agenda setting and the engagement of CS will be very important.
- Issues seen by  CS to put forward : of affordable access, human  
rights, privacy
- importance to build capacity at the national level. APC has had  
positive experience in this regards.




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