[governance] CONSENSUS CALL - STATEMENT ON IGF REVIEW

[jameleddine khemakhem]

Yes for the statement

ATUDE

 

De : Hartmut Glaser [mailto:glaser at nic.br] 
Envoyé : mercredi 18 février 2009 11:38
À : governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
Objet : Re: [governance] CONSENSUS CALL - STATEMENT ON IGF REVIEW

 


Yes ...

===================================
On 15/2/2009 20:23, 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

 <http://www.ianpeter.com> www.ianpeter.com

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090218/c7622cd2/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