[governance] Thoughts for Rio - pdf

[Adam Peake]

The proposal right on a number of important issues (it mirrors much 
of what was said in the caucus proposal in February), but is deeply 
flawed in suggesting that a bureau is in anyway an appropriate 
solution.  All a bureau would do in this UN context would reassert 
control by governments.

As we saw in WSIS the bureau structure was little more than 
governments giving civil society a pat on the head every so often, 
window dressing for multi-stakeholder participation.  Governments 
decided what would happen and told civil society how they would be 
allowed in over a glass of wine.  The bureau did virtually nothing to 
improve civil society's speaking rights, degree of participation or 
contribution to the agenda. (This is not to criticize the work of 
CONGO who were and still are magnificent in fighting civil society's 
position.)  The bureau structure is that of intergovernmental 
negotiation where civil society is a minor/insignificant player.

Every significant gain in how civil society has been able to 
participate in WSIS and after has been made through civil society 
organization from Internet policy traditions that simply got on and 
made themselves useful to the point of indispensable: true in WGIG 
and true in the IGF to date.  Neither WGIG or IGF would have happened 
without us: Athens would have been nothing without civil society's 
contribution at all levels.  (even with no funding support we were 
still the most numerous stakeholder 
<http://www.intgovforum.org/Athens_stats_stakeholder.php>)

Look at the degree of involvement we have in the IGF process compared 
to any other WSIS action line.

The proposal makes some good points. But a bureau would be a naive 
and foolish step back to intergovernmental driven process. If we want 
the states to lead us by the nose, form a bureau.

It's worth reading the transcript of the stocktaking session to 
understand some of the issues 
<http://www.intgovforum.org/Feb_igf_meeting/13_February_Consult_2007.txt>

Thanks,

Adam





At 11:04 AM -0400 5/19/07, Milton Mueller wrote:
>This is a very interesting and useful contribution. I am not in total
>agreement with some of the proposed recommendations, but I think the
>"Thoughts" focus on all the right problems with respect to the
>administration of the Forum.
>
>>>>  pouzin at well.com 05/19/07 3:12 AM >>>
>>Propositions-Rio-V10.3.pdf<
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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

____________________________________________________________
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