[governance] Input-2 for synthesis paper

Fri Sep 5 10:25:21 EDT 2008

Hello Parminder,

I am interested in editing this document. Please send me the link to the
Google Documents.

Sivasubramanian Muthusamy

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>wrote:

>  McTim
>
>
>
> > I want, as I think, as usual, the rhetoric is too strong.
>
> > McTim
>
>
>
> I have sent the link to you with right to edit the doc.
>
>
>
> Others who want to edit may also please ask.
>
>
>
> The draft as it stands can be seen below.
>
>
>
> Parminder
>
>
>
> *IGC's input -2 to the synthesis paper for IGF, Hyderabad.*
>
> * *
>
> *Review of the IGF*
>
>
>
> The Tunis Agenda (TA) calls for examining "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, we have two sets of comments. One set is
> regarding the process of the 'examining' or review of the IGF, and another
> consists of our substantive comments on the role, mandate and structure of
> the IGF.
>
>
>
> *Process of review *
>
>
>
> As mentioned in the Tunis Agenda, the process of review should be centered
> on consultations with Forum (IGF) participants. These consultations should
> be both formal and informal. It is important to lay out clear formal
> processes, apart from informal ones. It may also be very useful to go beyond
> IGF participants to reach out to other interested stakeholders, who for
> different reason may not attend the IGF meetings.
>
>
>
> In reaching out, the process of consultations should especially keep in
> mind constituencies that have lesser participation in IG issues at present.
> In this context, it is especially important to reach out more to
> constituencies in developing counties. It is important to make special
> efforts to reach out to various actors involved in development activity,
> including those of civil society. Other groups with lower participation in
> IG issues like women, ethnic minorities and disability groups should also be
> especially reached out to.
>
>
>
> If it is found necessary to do a expert evaluation to help the process of
> review, the process of selecting the 'experts' should be based on
> transparent rationale, and follow an open and transparent process. It is not
> advisable to rely on a *pro bono* evaluation, by any agency that offers
> it, for such a politically sensitive and important assessment. The selected
> experts should have adequate expertise in matter of global public policy and
> policy institutions. In view of the geo-political significance of IG, it may
> be useful to have a reputed public policy institution in the global South do
> the evaluation in partnership with one such institution from the North. Even
> if reliance on existing global institutions is sought, there should be
> adequate balancing of perspectives, and partnerships are a good way to
> ensure it.
>
>
>
> It is important that the process of review starts at the earliest,
> preferably with the forthcoming IGF meeting in Hyderabad. IGC held a
> workshop on 'role and mandate of the IGF' at Rio (see
> http://intgovforum.org/Rio_event_report.php?mem=30 ), and plans another
> one with the same title in Hyderabad. The outcomes from this workshop should
> feed into the main workshop on 'Taking stock and going forward'.
>
>
>
> *Substantive comments on the IGF mandate, role and structure *
>
>
>
> On the basic question of the review about desirability of continuation of
> the IGF, the Caucus is of the firm view that the IGF should continue beyond
> its first mandated period of five years.
>
>
>
> The Caucus agrees with the mandate given to the IGF by TA. We understand
> that the mandate is ambitious and complex, and a process of evolution
> towards its complete fulfillment may be needed. However, it is important to
> keep an eye on the full mandate as we go forward, and continuously make
> progress in achieving in its letter and intent.
>
>
>
> It is important that IGF remains open to addressing all issues that are in
> the IG space, no matter how controversial. Very likely, the more
> controversial an issue, more appropriate it may be to bring it to the IGF
> whereinputs from a diverse range of stakeholders can be sought. Outcomes
> from deliberations at the IGF can be used for global Internet policy making,
> which will help make policy-making processes more participative and
> democratic.
>
>
>
> The Tunis agenda calls for *"*development of multi-stakeholder processes
> at the national, regional…. level" similar to the IGF. It is heartening to
> note that some such national and regional processes are already taking shape
> [1]<http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dg8948rv_0fwg6ndg2&justBody=false&revision=_latest&timestamp=1220512245646&editMode=true&strip=true#_ftn1>.
> IGF should further encourage such processes and seek to establish formal
> relationships with these initiatives. However, this should be done in a
> manner that expands the multi-stakeholder nature of global internet policy
> institutional framework rather than narrows it. Since the fear of
> governmental domination is considerably higher at national levels, IGF
> should use global civil society groups and processes to guide appropriate
> multistakeholderisation of emerging national IGF spaces. IGC offers its
> assistance to the IGC in this regard.
>
>
>
> A greater need for the IGF to get deeper in substantive issues is already
> becoming evident. It is important in this regard for the IGF to have a more
> substantive inter-sessional work program rather than just of planning for
> the annual IGF event. It will be useful for this purpose for the MAG to
> operate in substantive themes based Working Groups, and also incorporating
> outside expertise in these WGs as required. Some start in this direction is
> expected to be made in the run-up to IGF, Hyderabad, whereby WGs of MAG
> members plus some outsiders are expected to prepare for main sessions. This
> useful start should be taken forward for more structured AND substantive
> inter-sessional work.
>
>
>
> As a global policy related institution it is important for the IGF to have
> stable public funding, and to insulate itself against any possibility of
> special interests influencing its working through control over funding. Such
> funding should not only enable appropriate and streamlined functioning of
> the IGF secretariat, the annual event and other proposed and inter-sessional
> activities, it should also be used to ensure equity in participation in the
> IGF across geographies and social groups.
>
>
>
> We congratulate the IGF secretariat on doing exemplary work in the last few
> years, on a very thin resource base, and in difficult conditions where
> different stakeholder groups involved in the IGF have very different
> orientations and expectations of the secretariat.  A lot of the IGF
> secretariat's work is indeed path-breaking in the UN system. However, it is
> very evident that the secretariat needs much better resource support that
> they have at present, if we are to fulfill all our expectations from this
> unique global institution.
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> [1]<http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dg8948rv_0fwg6ndg2&justBody=false&revision=_latest&timestamp=1220512245646&editMode=true&strip=true#_ftnref1>To mention some of them.
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>

-- 
http://www.linkedin.com/in/sivasubramanianmuthusamy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080905/73fa72d6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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