[governance] CONSENSUS CALL - STATEMENT ON IGF REVIEW

[Divina MEIGS]

Yes

Divina Frau-Meigs



Le 18/02/09 5:53, « ken lohento » <klohento at panos-ao.org> a écrit :

> 
> Yes
> 
> KL
> 
> Ian Peter a écrit :
>> 
>> 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
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1953 - Release Date: 02/14/09
>> 18:01:00
>> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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