[governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme paper.

[Adam Peake]

Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme paper.

Just say yes or no.

Anything controversial will just mean the letter's not going to get 
sent and again the caucus will have missed the opportunity to 
influence the process.  Bound to be spelling mistakes, typos and 
messed-up grammar (friendly amendments welcome.)

All the ideas in response to Parminder's email so I hope they have 
our coordinator's support.  He can decide on rough consensus or not.

Adam



Contribution on the Hyderabad Programme Paper

(1)  The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus fully supports the 
letter sent by the Internet Bill of Rights Coalition "Rights as core 
theme of the IGF".  The issue of rights and the Internet must remain 
a central theme of the IGF process.

(2) About the taking stock and way forward session: we suggest that 
this session be organized in the same "bottom-up" manner as the other 
main session workshops and debates.  In light of para 76 of the Tunis 
Agenda,

    "76. We ask the UN Secretary-General to examine the desirability 
of the continuation of the Forum, in formal consultation with Forum 
participants, within five years of its creation, and to make 
recommendations to the UN Membership in this regard."

it is important that a review and evaluation of the IGF begins promptly.

The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus is organizing a workshop 
"The role and mandate of the IGF" 
<http://www.intgovforum.org/workshops_08/showmelist.php?mem=71> and 
we would be pleased if this workshop could help support discussion 
during the taking stock session.  We would be pleased to work with 
the MAG and all other stakeholders in discussions to begin the 
process of review and evaluation of the IGF and how to best to 
include this important topic in the taking stock and way forward 
session at the Hyderabad meeting.

(3)  The process of merging individually proposed workshops and 
setting-up the working groups that are now developing the main 
session workshops has been very unclear.  How were some workshops 
accepted in these working groups and some not?  What efforts have 
been made to ensure that a balanced representation of views is 
present in each of the working groups organizing the main session 
workshops?

The caucus believes this process has not worked well, we would like 
clarification of the process and to be assured that all stakeholders 
will have the equal opportunity to participate in the working groups 
developing the main session workshops (and therefore greatly 
influencing the main session debates.)

(4) We would like to hear about logistical arrangements for the 
meetings, particularly the daily schedule (start, finish, breaks 
etc), information about hotels, particularly affordable hotels, food 
and refreshments, Internet cafes, and the IGF Village.

(5) Will there be funds to support participants from developing 
countries and civil society?  Could we please have details of this. 
We note that the September consultations may be too late to manage a 
smooth process for allocating funds. Improving participating from 
developing countries has been identified as a critical issue by the 
IGFs to date, we are concerned that it is not being adequately 
addressed.

Thank you,

Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus.



____________________________________________________________
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