[governance] CSTD and IGF review

[Adam Peake]

Parminder,

Thanks for this information.

I can confirm an outside evaluator for the IGF 
review is being considered, but it is not 
completely certain that such a review will be 
undertaken.  But all should be decided in a week 
or so, and as soon as it is a (assuming its 
decided an outside evaluation is needed) draft 
terms of reference will be posted on the IGF 
website.  Any outside review would be to provide 
"food for thought" type input for the IGF to 
consider.

About CSTD and timing. If there's to be an IGF in 
2011 then a decision will need to be made well in 
advance to allow for the selection of a host 
country and to allow the host time to prepare. My 
guess, only a guess, is the 2009 IGF would be the 
forum where "formal consultation with Forum 
participants" takes place. IGF's cost a lot of 
money ($ million) to hold and finding facilities 
for a couple of thousand people can't happen 
overnight.

Jeremy, Lee: could you provide an update on progress with the workshop.

Thanks,

Adam



At 11:41 AM +0530 8/1/08, Parminder wrote:
>Hi All
>
>This thread on CSTD resolution reminds me to 
>inform the list that during the May CSTD meeting 
>there were some exchanges among CSTD members on 
>the issue of IGF¹s 2010 review and many CSTD 
>members seemed quite convinced that ­being the 
>political body mandated with WSIS follow up ­ 
>the review will be anchored with and/or finally 
>decided by CSTD, which will appropriately advise 
>ECOSOC to appropriately instruct the Secretary 
>General.
>
>This above was not captured in formal documents 
>and therefore is kind of off-the-record.  
>
>The Tunis Agenda mandates this task to the UN 
>Secretary General, who should make 
>recommendations to the UN membership. It is 
>likely that the recommendations will first be 
>dealt by the CSTD.
>
>This may be important with regard to IG civil 
>society¹s engagement with 2009 and 2010 CSTD 
>meetings.
>
>The actual recommendations may only be presented 
>to the 2010 meeting, but any references about 
>IGF made by the CSTD in 2009 proceedings, in my 
>view, will be difficult for the UN Secretary 
>General¹s review process to ignore. That may 
>make engagements with the 2009 meeting 
>significant.
>
>And since engagement with the IGF has been one 
>of the main activities of the IG Caucus, the 
>caucus may want to make a statement to the CSTD 
>on its position, if one can be formed, on the 
>review of the IGF and in the language of Tunis 
>agenda of Œthe desirability of the continuation 
>of the Forum¹ apart from participating in the UN 
>Secretary General¹s consultation and review 
>process.
>
>I understand that a review by an outside agency 
>will begin soon and the active consultations 
>with stakeholders will take place over the next 
>year (I am constructing this from the bits and 
>pieces I have picked up here and there).
>
>Especially, keeping in view that IG Caucus was 
>ignored in the consultations over Œenhanced 
>cooperation¹, despite our writing to the SG¹s 
>office about it, we should become active early 
>with respect to the IGF consultations.
>
>We should develop our proposed workshop for IGF, 
>Hyderabad, ŒRole and mandate of the IGF¹ also 
>with this purpose in mind. Lee McKnight and 
>Jeremy Malcolm are leading a Working Group on 
>shaping this workshop. Anyone who wants to join 
>this group may write to either of them or to me, 
>offline. We also welcome suggestions for 
>speakers and regarding the format of the 
>workshop.  
>.
>Parminder
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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