[governance] IGF consultations - extending IGF's mandate

[BAUDOUIN SCHOMBE]

Dear all

 I take deeply Jean Fullsack view concerning DCs approach. Issues proposed
are objectives. So, it will be correct to open consultation among various
stakholders who are involved in IGF process and those are involved in ICT
proram in local, subregional and regional level.
The second issue is technical meeting.
Baudouin

2009/1/19 jlfullsack <jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr>

>  Dear Parminder and all
>
> I see a (highly important and urgent) issue to be added between (2) and (3)
> : IG and Developinng Countries.
>
> So far we -the grass-root orgs, either from these countries or from
> industrialised ones working with them- missed this issue to be given its
> right place during the IGF's debates. In my opinion there are two main
> themes related to this issue :
> (1) The actual inclusion of DCs (and not only some representatives of a
> minority of these countries participating to the IGF) in the discussions on
> IG, i.e. in the whole IGF process ;
> (2) Taking in account the spatial extension of the critical Internet
> resources, first of all the Internet backbone network with its IGX and IXP,
> in order to provide the  affordability to Internet access and services for
> these countries.
>
> Respecting that, the third point you raise should also encompass the
> financing of both these themes.
>
> All the best
> Jean-Louis Fullsack
>
> ---- Original Message -----
>
>  *From:* Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
> *To:* governance at lists.cpsr.org
>   *Sent:* Saturday, January 17, 2009 7:20 AM
> *Subject:* [governance] IGF consultations - extending IGF's mandate
>
> Dear All
>
> The Feb open consultations of the IGF have a specific purpose of getting
> views on the issue of extending the IGF's mandate. This issue will be
> considered by CSTD (commission of science and technology) and later UN's
> ECOSOC in 2010. The WSIS (world summit on the information society) mandated
> that the decision on the issue will be taken in 'consultation with IGF
> participants'. It is the first time that open consultations will be for 2
> days, and the reason for this is that oneday will be exclusively devoted to
> considering this particular issue.
>
> Now, it is not entirely clear if 'IGF participants' are only those who
> gather for the annual IGF, or the open consultations also in some form
> comprises of IGF participants. In any case, the open consultations in Geneva
> are supposed to give MAG its directions, and since MAG takes all process
> decisions, inputting into the forthcoming consultations can have important
> bearing on the process that will be followed in terms of what may constitute
> 'consultations with forum participants' for deciding on continuation of the
> IGF. However, I am of the opinion that we should also put in our substantive
> comments on the continuation of the IGF right away.
>
> Just to kickstart the discussion, my view is that;
>
> (1) First of all we should clearly, and unambiguously, state that we will
> that IGF has a crucial and unparalleled role in the area of IG, specifically
> global public policy making in this area. For this reason, not only the IGF
> should be continued beyond 2010, but it should be suitably strengthened.
>
> (2) We should also assert that there are two clear, and relatively
> distinct, mandates of the IGF -  first, regarding public policy functions,
> as a forum for multistakeholder policy dialogue, and second, regarding
> capacity building. Both aspects of the IGF's role needs to be strengthened.
> Especially, one role (for instance, capacity building) should not be
> promoted to the exclusion of the other (policy related role). If the IGF is
> assessed not to be sufficiently contributing to its one or the other
> principal roles, adequate measures should be considered to improve its
> effectivenesses vis-a-vis that role.
>
> (3) The IGF should be assured stable and sufficient public funding to be
> able to carry its functions effectively, and impartially in global public
> interest.
>
> Also is enclosed the contribution IGC made late last year to the synthesis
> paper on this subject.
>
> parminder
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
COORDONNATEUR NATIONAL REPRONTIC
COORDONNATEUR SOUS REGIONAL ACSIS/AFRIQUE CENTRALE
MEMBRE FACILITATEUR GAID AFRIQUE
téléphone fixe: +243 1510 34 91
Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243999334571
email:b.schombe at gmail.com <email%3Ab.schombe at gmail.com>
http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090119/5e8afcbf/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