[governance] Consensus call on IGF review - YESor NO response

[Stefano Trumpy]

>Here is the second statement we have been preparing, and the less
>controversial one. Again, a YES or NO response is required within 48 hours
>to meet the Secretariat's deadline.

I vote YES
Stefano Trumpy

>
>
>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 will also be
>necessary to go beyond IGF participants to reach out to other interested
>stakeholders, who for different reasons 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, including constituencies in developing counties 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 should be open and transparent. It is not
>advisable to rely solely 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.
>
>
>
>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, the more appropriate it may be to bring it to
>the IGF where inputs from a diverse range of stakeholders can be sought.
>Deliberations at the IGF can be used as inputs 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. IGF should further encourage such processes and seek to
>establish formal relationships with these initiatives. 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
>evident to some. It is desirable in this regard for the IGF to have an
>inter-sessional work program in addition planning for the annual IGF
>event. It will be useful for this purpose for the MAG to operate in
>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.
>
>            
>
>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.
>
>
>________________________________
>
>
>Ian Peter
>____________________________________________________________
>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
>
>Attachment converted: ALTRO:message-footer 4.txt (TEXT/MSWD) (00004464)


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ing. Stefano TRUMPY
CNR - Istituto di Informatica e Telematica

Phone: +39 050 3152634
Mobile: +39 348 8218618
E-mail: stefano.trumpy at iit.cnr.it
____________________________________________________________
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