AW: [governance] Re: what is it that threatens the Internet community or 'who is afraid of the IGF'

[Kleinwächter, Wolfgang]

Here are some brief comments:
 
I would be very carefully to move too quickly to institutionalize the MAG. If it comes to buerocracy we should be aware that CS would probably not the winner of a redistribution of competences. I would prefer to go slowly bottom up and to develop innovative concepts for the 2008/2009 when the whole process is reconsidered and probably will be restablished in 2010. We should not forget that the IGF (like EC) was the result of a compromise and the recognition that a "solution" of open issues was out of reach in 2005. All sides agreed to buy some time and to wait. We should fill this time with more creative debates that with "power plays" on a redistribution of functions. This includes that the CS members of the MAG should are a. more active and b. report back to the caucus as much as possible. 
 
BTW, the MAG is not yet a really body like the WGIG was. Also the debate this week was not really focsed and very burocratic. It promoited a little bit the understanding of the main issues related to the five themes, which will be reflected in the new paper (and where CS people made a good contributions and - more kmportant - where heard and treated as equals. One reason for the uncertainty is is that nobody has really a strategy how to fill this new space and how to develop the IGF into a "new animal" of internaitonal relations. This is indeed an experimental phase and a lot of things can be developed better more silently bottom up as long our group knows what it wants.So a content and strategy discussion would be more helpful than the call for fixing institutional rights and duties in a power body.  
 
With regard to the Co-Chair I think it is important to recognize that the Brazilian Co-Chair does not represent the Brazilian government but the host country. This is for some people probably something like hair splitting but we shuld not understimate the interesting diplomatic difference.    
 
Best regards
 
wolfgang

________________________________

Von: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
Gesendet: Do 06.09.2007 10:35
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: [governance] Re: what is it that threatens the Internet community or 'who is afraid of the IGF'




I must though mention (in relation to my earlier email on Brazilian co-chair)  that I agree with the Brazilian position stated at the May consultations and re-stated in September consultations that instead of the present situation where all authority and power is vested in the UN Secy General, and the MAG merely advises him, it is better to move towards a more empowered IGF committee or something (this is not necessarily connected to IGF's recommendation giving possibilities, which can be discussed separately, and not also to a 3 or 4 part bureau) that exercises authority on its own behalf. We should be happy to have a multistakeholder body exercise this authority rather than the UN Sect General and the connected bureaucracy. 

I don't see members of IGC taking any view on this, which is surprising. What is the justification in not wanting IGF related powers to be with a multistakeholder group, rather than this group that just advises the UN Secy General.  Why are we not promoting real CS stakeholdership in global governance, and rather pulling back from a process that seeks to do so? 

Why our exaggerated fears of a strong IGF more important that the possibility of CS being an equal part of a substantive and self governing global governance body?

However, I won't like to see governmental co-chairship of MAG as a process towards such substantive strengthening. I prefer a UN Sec Gen nominated chair.

Parminder

________________________________________________

Parminder Jeet Singh

IT for Change, Bangalore

Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities 

Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890

Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055

www.ITforChange.net 

____________________________________________________________
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