[governance] Draft proposal for IGC workshop

[Jeremy Malcolm]

Meryem Marzouki wrote:
> 1. Provide a concise formulation for the proposed workshop theme.
> 
> The role, mandate, processes and outcomes of IGF: a self-reflective 
> exercise
> 
> The Tunis Agenda mandated the IGF to address critically important, 
> value-adding functions that cannot be performed by any existing Internet 

I would say "could not be", just because the IGF exists now.

> governance mechanism. Inter alia, the IGF should bring emerging issues 
> to the attention, and, where appropriate, make recommendations. It 

I would say to the attention "of the relevant bodies".

> should also promote and assess the embodiment of WSIS principles in 
> Internet governance processes. Furthermore, it should strengthen and 
> enhance the engagement of stakeholders in Internet governance 
> mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries. To which 
> extent this mandate has been fulfilled at this step, which difficulties 
> have been identified and how could they be solved in order to achieve 
> this mandate?

I would say "To what extent this mandate has been fulfilled at this stage".

Otherwise this looks very good.  Not much circumlocution in the wording, 
but that suits me.

> 3. Why do you think the proposed theme is important?
> 
> The IGF is unanimously considered as one of the main outcomes of the 
> WSIS process, and an innovation in the arena of global governance. Two 
> years after WSIS and one year after the IGF inaugural meeting in Athens, 
> this workshop aims at providing the means of a self-reflective exercise 
> to all IGF stakeholders, as a reflexive governance analysis process in 
> line with the IGF unique innovative feature.

I'm not sure what you mean by "in line with the IGF unique innovative 
feature" so I would just delete that part.

> Possible panelists
...
> -       Nitin Desai (as chair of both the MAG and formerly WGIG)
> -       Markus Kummer (as Secretary of both the MAG and formerly WGIG)

Hmm.  I am worried that they might be inclined to upstage the other 
panelists, and since they are both pushing much the same barrow, I would 
suggest that perhaps only one or the other (perhaps Markus in 
preference) be invited to speak.

> -       IGO: as hard as gov. Either none, or ITU as WSIS organizer (but 
> far from satisfactory:)), or ??

We seem to be stacking the panel with IGF cynics.  How about either the 
Council of Europe or the OECD, both of which have made more positive 
contributions?

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor
host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
____________________________________________________________
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