[governance] IGC's questions to the IGF

[Vittorio Bertola]

Jeremy Malcolm ha scritto:
> Here is my attempt, based loosely on Parminder's draft but shortened and 
> simplified and rephrased in the form of a petition. Comments, 

First of all, I don't like the "intimidating" style, with premises, 
lists and capitalized words... I would do something less formal, for 
example in the form of a letter. Something like: "We consider the IGF as 
one... and express... We are committed to... . However, we are concerned 
that..."

As for the substance:

> TO the Secretary-General of the United Nations
> AND TO the Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
> 
> CONSIDERING the IGF as one of the most important outcomes of the WSIS 
> process, which promises to be an innovation in the arena of global 
> governance;
> 
> EXPRESSING our strong appreciation for the value that the IGF brings to 
> global policy arena and for the work of the Secretariat and the Advisory 
> Group to date;
> 
> AND COMMITTED to our to full cooperation with an IGF process that 
> embodies multilateral, multi-stakeholder, democratic and transparent 
> principles;
> 
> BUT CONCERNED that these principles not be left behind in the 
> unavoidable haste of all parties to convene and successfully conclude 
> the IGF's inaugural meeting in Athens;
> 
> WE THE UNDERSIGNED hereby call upon the Secretary-General of the United 
> Nations to request the Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum to 
> fulfil its mandate to convene the IGF as a forum for multi-stakeholder 
> policy dialogue in an open and inclusive process by:
> 
> 1. AFFIRMING that the IGF as not merely an open space in which free 
> discussion can take place,

For what we see until now, it is not even that. "Free discussion" means 
that any interested person can have a chance to talk, which is not what 
is going to happen in Athens - not by anyone's fault, but for the 
formula that was chosen. Let me give it a try:

"The first instance of the IGF has apparently been conceived on the 
model of an international conference, with pre-arranged panelists 
instructing the audience on pre-defined themes, and limited 
opportunities for participants to express their views, or to raise other 
issues. While we appreciate the effort, we would like to ensure that any 
stakeholder has sufficient opportunities to express views, raise issues 
of concern, gather interest in them, and get them addressed at the IGF 
or forwarded to the appropriate venue. In other words, we would like to 
stress the importance of replacing top-down organizational models with 
bottom-up procedures, where a sufficient number of participants can put 
issues on the agenda and start working on them."

(too long?)

> but rather a deliberative body whose 
> legitimacy to occupy this role stems from its special character as a 
> network of equal stakeholders.

Rather than "deliberative" (that usually implies some power and scares 
anti-regulatory people), I would say something like "We see the IGF as a 
body that can promote and confirm consensus on non-binding policy 
recommendations, as per part (g) of its mandate, given the legitimacy 
stemming from the Tunis agreements and from its special character as a 
network of equal stakeholders."

> 2. FACILITATING the development of structures and processes within the 
> IGF within which for such deliberation to take place, and thus enabling 
> the IGF to fulfil its mandate given in paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda, 
> including sub-paragraphs (c), (e), (g) and (k), all of which clearly 
> bespeak an strong element of agency on the part of the IGF.
> 
> 3. DEVELOPING in an open and collaborative process a structure of 
> Working Groups for the IGF around important issues and areas, which 
> would work on an ongoing basis, through virtual as well as face-to-face 
> means, and would report and be accountable to the IGF at large.
> 
> 4. INCREASING the transparency and inclusiveness of IGF processes, 
> including the release of information about the manner of Advisory Group 
> selections, their processes and outcomes, and opening these processes to 
> receive the input of all stakeholders.

I would rather state a revolutionary (in the UN environment) but very 
important principle: that civil society representatives in the AG and 
any other groups should be self-selected by civil society itself, under 
transparent and accountable procedures. I would add that the IGC has 
chartered itself to ensure such procedures for what pertains to its own 
participation.

I would also add that we are dissatisfied with the very limited 
representation of civil society (excluding the technical & academic 
community, which was eventually treated as a fourth group and is 
actually much better represented than us) in the current AG, only 4-5 
individuals on 46. We should perhaps even say that we expect one fourth 
of the group to come from CS.

> 5. CONSIDERING the need for provision for the travel expenses of members 
> from developing counties and other disadvantaged groups wishing to 
> participate effectively in IGF deliberations, and for ensuring that the 
> contributions of remote participants are accorded equal weight and 
> authority as those of participants present in person.
> 
> 6. INITIATING a process of enhanced cooperation for development of 
> globally-applicable principles on public policy issues, as called for by 
>  paragraphs 69, 70 and 71 of the Tunis Agenda, to be conducted within 
> the framework of the IGF.
> 
> Sincerely submitted by the undersigned,

In the overall, I think it's a good petition. But I'd like to understand 
whether there's consensus on it - even if, I guess, we could get a lot 
of signatories during the meeting (especially if we don't make it too 
radical) and thus we should deliver it on the last day.
-- 
vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance