[governance] Going forward - Role of the governance caucus

[Meryem Marzouki]

Hi Jeanette,

Le 2 mars 06 à 21:51, Jeanette Hofmann a écrit :

> Hi Meryem, if I understand correctly,
>
> you see two options for the caucus to move forward:
>
> 1. the caucus can stay as it is and try to give itself a structure
> 2. it could differentiate itself into smaller entities
>
> [...]There is certainly no danger that the caucus claims any
> authority beyond its members.

It's not about any "taking over" danger (which is unlikely). Just  
that it seems difficult, given the diversity of this caucus, that it  
comes up with any caucus substantive opinion, thus the need to form  
more targetted coalitions/groups, and yes, MMWG is certainly one of  
them.

It remains then, for the caucus as such, the two roles identified by  
Milton: organizational and discussion space for (at large) governance  
issues.

The second role is not problematic, not exclusive of other spaces (if  
any), and thus most welcome.

The first one, I think, should be inclusive of all other CS groups,  
already or not involved in WSIS, recomposed or not.
Since this caucus/mailing list is certainly still seen by many - if  
not the majority - as a given CS group with its own history and  
issues, like any other WSIS caucus, my opinion is that it would be  
preferable and easier that at least the organizational role be played  
by a (not necessarily the current one) plenary or, better, a CS  
coordination/liaison group for governance (IGF) issues. Something  
like a (CS bureau + CS 'content and themes') dedicated to deal with  
CS relations to IGF, and coordinating all CS caucuses/coalitions that  
want to have a say in this process. We can have a similar  
coordination/liaison group to deal with other post-wsis issues  
(follow-up, implementation, etc.). Alternatively, we can have just  
one such CS coordination/liaison group, dealing with all post-wsis  
issues. At this step of the discussion, frankly I have no idea of  
which configuration would be preferable. What I know for sure is that  
the current "structures", particularly the CSB, should not stay as  
they are.

In summary, my opinion is:
- This caucus could remain a discussion place for (at large)  
governance issues
- Any (already existing or to be recomposed/newly formed) caucus/ 
coalition could be formed to develop substantive opinions on various  
governance issues (and other post-wsis issues as well)
- One (or more) CS coordination/liaison group should be formed to  
deeal with organizational matters and, if desirable and possible,  
facilitate global CS at post-wsis opinions/declarations developments.

Meryem


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