[governance] IGF meeting, Geneva, 23-24 February 2009

Tue Dec 16 05:24:49 EST 2008

Hi Adam and all,

>From what I see here, the need is for practical directions then just
the same people sitting in the IGF changing hats and declaring dynamic
coalitions.

I say this because I participated with a number of our members at the
OECD Ministerial on the Future of the Internet Economy and what came
forward as the CS Seoul Declaration set forth some what a practical
path for atleast the CS groups to intervene with the OECD even though
it is a slow process and evolved over the past 10 years.

We have to realize that Governments cannot achieve their policies
without partnering with CS groups and that CS groups act as the
catalyst but are the right CS groups participating or is it just more
or less the same faces representing countries and their CS groups over
and over again without attaining certain progress.

I would say this because the IGF has been very weak to address the
issues of Openness even though people may throw a load of documents in
my face, but still, I would be determined this year to invite and
group up with the REAL openness advocates that have shown such worth
and deliberations in their work as well as activism to be the ones to
saddle this horse and intervene with a well prepared and solution
focused workshop that would not be just one day but would continue
during the duration of the IGF in Egypt and come out with practical
direction for the IGF.

We tend to ignore many issues that Parminder today has put back into
focus and as Asif Kabani has shared on certain occasions that our
pursuit should be now very practical. We don't have to rant the same
issues over and over again, instead, we have to bring the right set of
people to the table.

I would like to show you an example of the situation through this
contribution by our side to the Global Information Society Watch
Report for the years 2007 and 2008:
GISW Pakistan 2007 Report: http://www.giswatch.org/files/pdf/GISW_Pakistan.pdf
GISW Pakistan 2008 Report:
http://www.giswatch.org/gisw2008/country/pdf/Pakistan.pdf

Once you go through these reports, you will see that we as CS Caucus
members have contributed key issues and then have been advocating the
development of a new IT/ICT Policy in the country taking action to
convince the government to include actions in their policies to
overcome these. Starting from my participation in the WSIS process to
this is a regional achievement but again there is no opportunity for
us to go to the IGF and take forward action.

I want us to realize that practical action is happening but is not
being fed into the IGF, why, the wrong people are participating that
have more or less no share in the practical policy change and
environment change activities of the various developing countries
challenged by the digital divide.

Once again I want everyone to realize, it is time to put the efforts
done on the table post WSIS, take stock, determine direction,
associate them to the IGF process and determine the future of the IGF
country wise and CS effort wise. If you dont present your examples
there will be no recognition by the governments and you will see IGF
sinking.

Once again, on behalf of the CS Caucus, I give a call for the Openness
Committee formulation that will lead actionable deliberations and
interventions at IGF Egypt and feed a practical report to the
Chairman's notes and document on the future of IGF!

I need your buyin!

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> From the IGF website
> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/index.php/component/content/article/42-igf-meetings/313-taking-stock-of-the-hyderabad-meeting-preparing-the-igf-review-process
>>
>
>
> Consultations open to all stakeholders will be held in Geneva on 23-24
> February.
>
> Two main items will be on the agenda:
>
> * Taking stock of the Hyderabad Meeting and suggest improvements for the
> 2009 Meeting to be held in Sharm El Sheikh
>
> * Preparing the IGF Review process.
>
> Written contributions are welcome and will be posted on this Web site. To
> facilitate the discussions, a questionnaire will be made available in due
> course.
>
>  - - - -
>
> On the first, it's time to suggest new themes, how to deal with old,
> possible new formats, what worked well and less well in Hyderabad (this may
> seem trivial, but please remember to say how much the lunch was
> appreciated!)
>
> On themes, I hope some time will be given over to discussion from national
> and regional IGF meetings.
>
> Nitin Desai's comments during the taking stock are well worth reading.
>
> On the second issue, the IGF review, Markus Kummer gave an outline of the
> expected time line and some background of the review process during the
> taking stock session in Hyderabad, he said:
>
> "The mandate is, shall we say, relatively clear.  It has to be -- it has to
> take place within five years of its creation.  And this generally assumed
> that the creation dates back to Tunis 2005.  So the Secretary-General will
> have to make a recommendation to member states, as it is stated in the Tunis
> agenda, and make recommendations so that a decision can be taken within
> these five years.
>
> This brings us to the General Assembly of 2009 -- 2010.  Sorry.  That is two
> years from now.
>
> And in order to get there, we will have to get started soon.  In order for
> the General Assembly to take a decision, the report from the
> Secretary-General needs to be ready in early 2010.  It will then go to the
> CSTD in May 2010, from there to ECOSOC in July 2010, and from ECOSOC to the
> General Assembly, which then has the last word on whether or not to continue
> the forum in December 2010.
>
> In other words, we will have to get started early next year, and we will
> prepare that with a day set aside at the meetings in February. We have the
> dates already for the open consultations.  That is 23rd and 24th of
> February.  And one day of these two days will be set aside for the
> discussion on how to prepare this review process.
>
> And, of course, we invite all stakeholders to post their ideas and comments.
>  And we'll post it on our Web site.  And we will, as usual, prepare a paper
> as an input into the discussions.
>
> The process will then be conducted on the basis of these discussions in
> February and brought to fruition at the meeting in Egypt sometime in late
> fall.  And I am given to understand that our Egyptian hosts may be able to
> announce us the dates later today. [15-18 November]
>
> But it is also, I think, understood and also not the desire of our Egyptian
> hosts to turn the meeting in Egypt into an inward-looking meeting where we
> discuss the future of the IGF.  This will be one item on the agenda of the
> meeting, like we have today, the taking stock and the way forward.  We would
> then discuss the review.
>
> But the actual review will have to take place at the meeting itself. The
> mandate says the Secretary-General will have to consult -- informal
> consultations with forum participants.  And that can only be the annual
> meeting of the IGF.
>
> So we will have to come to consensus in this area.  We do say the IGF is not
> a decision-making body.  But we will have to find some way of reaching a
> consensus on what will then go into the report of the Secretary-General.
>  But the final decision will be with the member states in the various
> instances, CSTD, ECOSOC, and, finally, General Assembly."
>
> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/hyderabad_prog/TSAWF.html>
>
> Worth seeing the complete quote, then there shouldn't be any (many)
> questions.
>
> Adam
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>

-- 

Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
____________________________________________________________
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