[governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad

[Adam Peake]

Parminder,

Thanks, I agree with your changes.  Let's aim to 
get the letter out on the 15th.

Adam




>Ok, Adam, lets take a shot at it.
>
>I think this draft is good to take forward.
>
>My suggestion. Since what really matters are the portions that go into the
>synthesis paper, lets focus on such stuff as can figure most prominently in
>such a paper.
>
>As for website posting of our contribution, that remains open till the
>consultations. We can have such a full letter online a bit later, if needed,
>but for now lets choose very solid stuff on a few points and put in clear
>strong text that will be difficult to avoid for the persons compiling the
>document as too general and such.
>
>For this purpose, first of all, I will remove the logistics point, which
>says nothing. So lets focus on the other 4 points. I am making a few changes
>in the text under these points. I can take suggestions from the members for
>the next 24 hours. Immediately afterwards I will post the text for rough
>consensus.
>
>As Adam suggested please suggest only such stuff which is likely to be able
>to be pulled into a document that can plausibly be put for seeking rough
>consensus. 
>
>(suggested text below - open for suggestions, but please see the caveat
>above)
>
>Contribution on the IGF Hyderabad Programme Paper
>
>(1)  The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus fully supports the letter
>sent by the Internet Bill of Rights Dynamic Coalition on "Rights as a 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, and
>in  a duly open and participative manner.
>
>The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus organized a workshop on "The
>role and mandate of the IGF" at IGF, Rio, and is organizing another with the
>same title at IGF, Hyderabad,
><http://www.intgovforum.org/workshops_08/showmelist.php?mem=71> and we would
>be pleased if this workshop, and the IGC, could help support the organizing
>of and the discussion during the taking stock and way forward session, in
>the same way as the preparation for the other main sessions is being done in
>collaboration with some workshop organizers.  We would be pleased to work
>with the MAG and all other stakeholders to use this session to begin the
>process of review and evaluation of the IGF.
>
>(3)  The process of merging individually proposed workshops and setting-up
>the working groups that are to develop 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 needs to be improved and made more
>transparent. We would like clarification of the process and to be assured
>that all stakeholders, and holders of all viewpoints, will have an equal
>opportunity to participate in the working groups developing the main session
>workshops (and therefore greatly influencing the main session debates.)
>
>(4) Improving participating from developing countries has been identified as
>a critical issue by the IGFs to date. We are concerned that this issue is
>not being adequately addressed. We will specifically like to know about the
>funding support available for participation of civil society  from
>developing countries. We note that the September consultations may be too
>late to manage a smooth process for allocating funds, and request that
>immediate action be taken in this regard, and the IGC informed about it.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
>>  Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 3:04 PM
>>  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>  Subject: [governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme
>>  paper.
>>
>>  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
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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