[governance] MAG mandate extended, call for new members:

[Parminder]

> Parminder, I don't see much change from the press release announcing
> the MAG in August 2007
> <http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2007/pi1791.doc.htm>

I noted this. But the evolution is on terms of it being made specifically as
a kind of condition for selecting new members, since the part I quoted
follows the part which speaks about new members.

" The Advisory Group will renew up to one third of its members within
> >>  each stakeholder group.  All relevant stakeholder groups,
> >>  representing Governments, private sector and civil society, including
> >>  the academic and technical communities will submit names to the
> >>  Internet Governance Forum Secretariat."

After which follows

All members serve in their
> >  > personal capacity, but are expected to have extensive linkages with
> >>  relevant stakeholder groups.  Members need to be willing to reach out
> >>  and ensure continuous flow of information to and from interested
> >>  groups and to participate actively and constructively in the Group's
> >>  work.  


Apparently, SG in selecting new MAG members will keep in mind both these
factors, or at least he should keep them in mind as per this above
declaration.  Correspondingly, IGC and other groups forwarding names should
also keep these in kinds.   And these 'new' factors are not entirely
obvious. I can think of very progressive minded persons who really score
very poorly on 'extensive linkages with civil society groups (the relevant
stakeholder groups in this case). And I can think of people who are not too
good at or keen on ensuring continuous flow of information to and from...


I am sure these factors would have been in the back of the mind of the
nomcom, at least to some extent, but if the nomcom had worked after this
declaration it is entirely likely, and in my opinion, very reasonable, that
these factors would have been applied more clearly and explicitly.  

Do you not read in the above some new developments.

 To take a non-CS example, the new conditions mean that we just cant have a
microsoft or an intel person in the private sector part of the MAG, the
person should be able to demonstrate sufficient linkages to business sector
in general, and, an even more difficult condition, be willing to communicate
effectively with a good swathe of business persons/ entities/ interests. 


Also, getting on to an issue about which you have often argued - personal
capacity versus representation-ness. Apart from the fact that all the above
'conditions' anchor the representative-ness aspect of MAG membership quite
strongly, for the first time the phrase 'MAG members serve in personal
capacity' has a clear qualifier 'but' balancing it with certain amount of
representativeness. We all know, at least I have argued often, that no
represenativeness, in any system, is ever absolute, as is personal capacity
never absolute. Which makes the reverse of this true, that there is some
degree of representiveness in MAG members as there is some amount of
'personal capacity'. I know it should be obvious, but there are times when
the 'personal capacity' argument has been taken too far.


I think these new developments are so salutary for moving towards more
legitimate global public bodies, especially in the contexts of some new-age
obfuscations that have off late been quite strong, that I am inclined to
write a congratulatory letter to the SG.

Parminder  


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 10:20 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: RE: [governance] MAG mandate extended, call for new members:
> 
> Parminder, I don't see much change from the press release announcing
> the MAG in August 2007
> <http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2007/pi1791.doc.htm>
> 
> "The 47 Advisory Group members will serve in their personal capacity.
> They have been chosen from Governments, the private sector and civil
> society, including the academic and technical communities,
> representing all regions.
> 
> As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance
> the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous
> flow of information between its members and the various interested
> groups.  It has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable
> rotation among its members, based on recommendations from the various
> interested groups."
> 
> It also reflects the MAG's recommendations "Members should possess
> relevant knowledge and willingness to reach out and ensure continuous
> flow of information to and from interested groups." etc.
> <http://intgovforum.org/AGD/MAG.Summary.28.02.2008.v3.pdf>
> 
> The IGF website now has a note about renewal of the MAG and asks for
> proposals for new members.  It does not include the May 21 deadline
> and I wonder if this is a mistake (Markus mentioned May 21 as the
> deadline for proposing names on the MAG list a few days ago.  Will
> check.)
> 
> There' also a new note about workshops.  We can continue to edit
> workshop proposals until May 9.  After that the online form will be
> frozen until after the consultation when the pages will re-open and
> proposals can continue to be updated.
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >I find the following part form the UN press release significant, and also
> >relevant to some of the discussion we have on CS and IGC sponsored MAG
> >members on this list.
> >
> >" All members serve in their personal capacity, but are expected to have
> >extensive linkages with relevant stakeholder groups.  Members need to be
> >willing to reach out and ensure continuous flow of information to and
> from
> >interested groups.........."
> >
> >Earlier, if I remember right, it was only 'serve in their personal
> >capacity'. Some kind of representative aspect is now clearly built in,
> and
> >also post- nomination accountability in form of clear proof of
> willingness
> >to reach and out and ensure continuous flow of information to and from
> >interested groups...
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >Parminder
> >
> >>  -----Original Message-----
> >>  From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> >>  Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 9:44 PM
> >>  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>  Subject: [governance] MAG mandate extended, call for new members:
> deadline
> >>  May 21
> >>
> >>  Markus Kummer just sent a note to the MAG list about the group's
> >>  mandate: the mandate's been extended, and the secretariat is now able
> >>  to issue a formal call for new members.  The deadline will be May 21.
> >>  More about this on the IGF website soon.
> >>
> >>  Nitin Desai has been asked to continue as chair.
> >>
> >>  Press release below. The secretary general accepted the MAG's advice
> >>  from the February meeting about rotating up to one third.
> >>
> >>  (as this list has a delay I expect I won't be the only one sending
> >>  this info...)
> >>
> >>  Adam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >  > http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2008/pi1829.doc.htm
> >>
> >>  MANDATE OF ADVISORY GROUP OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM EXTENDED
> >>
> >>  The mandate of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group of the Internet
> >>  Governance Forum has been extended.  The Special Adviser for Internet
> >>  Governance to the Secretary-General, Nitin Desai, has been asked to
> >>  continue as the Chairman of the Advisory Group, which will meet again
> >>  on 13 to 15 May in Geneva before handing over to a renewed group to
> >>  prepare the next Internet Governance Forum meeting in Hyderabad,
> >>  India, on 3 to 6 December.
> >>
> >>  The Advisory Group will renew up to one third of its members within
> >>  each stakeholder group.  All relevant stakeholder groups,
> >>  representing Governments, private sector and civil society, including
> >>  the academic and technical communities will submit names to the
> >>  Internet Governance Forum Secretariat.  All members serve in their
> >  > personal capacity, but are expected to have extensive linkages with
> >>  relevant stakeholder groups.  Members need to be willing to reach out
> >>  and ensure continuous flow of information to and from interested
> >>  groups and to participate actively and constructively in the Group's
> >>  work.  More details are available on the Internet Governance Forum
> >>  website:  www.intgovforum.org.
> >>
> >>  The Internet Governance Forum is an outcome of the Tunis phase of the
> >>  World Summit on the Information Society, which took place in 2005.
> >>  In the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, Governments asked
> >>  the Secretary-General to convene a "new forum for policy dialogue" to
> >>  discuss issues related to key elements of Internet governance and set
> >>  out the Forum's mandate.
> >>
> >>  The Forum's first two meetings took place in Athens in November 2006
> >  > and in Rio de Janeiro in November 2007.  A stock-taking session in
> >>  Geneva on 26 February 2008 showed broad support for a continuation of
> >>  the multi-stakeholder preparatory process.
> >>  ____________________________________________________________
> >>  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