[governance] CONSENSUS CALL - STATEMENT ON IGF REVIEW

[Hakikur Rahman]

I vote YES.

Hakikur Rahman

At 11:23 PM 2/15/2009, Ian Peter wrote:
>We now need to wrap this up for presentation in Geneva next week. 
>Please indicate either YES or NO to the statement below in response 
>to this message.
>
>If you are responding NO and can outline why you are opposed, that 
>would be helpful. We may still be able to accommodate small 
>amendments if necessary.
>
>
>STATEMENT
>
>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 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.
>
>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.
>
>IGC believes that a structured analysis of the performance of IGF, 
>accompanied by a suitable methodology for consultation, analysis, 
>and stakeholder input. is important to the credibility and the 
>usefulness of the IGF review. We suggest that either the MAG or a 
>specially appointed represented multistakeholder group be tasked 
>with overseeing the process and making recommendations based on this analysis.
>
>In order to demonstrate that the analysis is both objective and 
>transparent, it should be conducted by a body or bodies that are 
>independent from the IGF and its active stakeholders (including the 
>United Nations). 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. There should 
>be adequate balancing of perspectives, including global North/South 
>perspectives, and partnerships are a good way to ensure it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Ian Peter
>PO Box 429
>Bangalow NSW 2479
>Australia
>Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773
>www.ianpeter.com
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090216/2dea1afb/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