[governance] Q4 MAG - Request for a MAG member volunteer to update Q4

[Ginger Paque]

As Ian pointed out, the text in Q4 is just copy/pasted from IGC's 
previous statement. Could one of our MAG members please update this 
section? Perhaps we should also add something about the Open 
Consultations, which have allowed input from all groups...

I would greatly appreciate someone answering to confirm they will do this.

Thanks, Ginger


4. How effective are IGF processes in addressing the tasks set out for 
it, including the functioning of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group 
(MAG), Secretariat and open consultations?

At the outset of this statement on renewal and restructuring of the 
Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group, the Civil Society IG Caucus would like 
to appeal to all stakeholders that we should all use the full term 
"multi-stakeholder advisory group" or MAG, at least for official 
purposes, because multi-stakeholderism is the most important aspect of 
the IGF.

MAG is the driving seat of the IGF, and restructuring MAG is basic to 
making IGF more effective and productive. We very much appreciate the 
new measures of transparency taken with respect to MAG's working. We are 
of the view that MAG should work through two e-lists - one open and the 
other closed. Since MAG discusses issues of public importance, normally 
discussions should be open to public scrutiny. However we do understand 
that there can be some circumstances that require closed discussions. 
All discussions taken to the closed list should be listed, and summaries 
of them provided, as appropriate. By the same rule, transcripts should 
be provided for all face-to-face meetings of the MAG, unless some topics 
are expressly chosen to be dealt in a closed manner, in which case such 
topics should be listed, and summary of discussions provided, as 
appropriate.

*Membership of the MAG*

• The MAG should be large enough so that its members bring the required 
balance of stakeholder interests, diversity and experience, but not so 
large as to cause the group to be ineffective. In the present 
circumstances, we think that 40 is a good number for MAG members. One 
third of MAG members should be rotated every year.
• In the interest of transparency and understanding the responsibilities 
of MAG members, when making appointments to the MAG we request the 
Secretary General to explain which interested group that person is 
associated with. The rules for membership of the MAG should be clearly 
established, and made open along with due justifications.
• Civil society has been under represented in the multi-stakeholder 
advisory groups appointed in 2006 and 2007, this anomaly should be 
corrected in this round of rotation and a fair balance of members among 
all stakeholders assured. Fair civil society representation is necessary 
to ensure legitimacy for this new experiment in global governance.
• We agree that the organizations having an important role in Internet 
administration and the development of Internet-related technical 
standards should
continue to be represented in the MAG. However, their representation 
should not be at the expense of civil society participation.
• Stakeholder representatives should be chosen based on appropriate 
processes of self-selection by stakeholder groups. We do appreciate that 
it is difficult to recognize any one stakeholder entity, or even a given 
set of them, as completely representing the whole of that particular 
stakeholder group. This complicates the process of selection, especially 
in the case of civil society and business sectors, and provides scope 
for the final selecting authority exercising a degree of judgment. This, 
however, should be done in a completely transparent manner. Deviations 
from the self-selection processes of stakeholder groups should be kept 
to the minimum.
• When recommending members of the MAG all stakeholders should ensure 
diversity in terms of gender, geography, and, where applicable, special 
interest groups.

*Role and Structure of the MAG*

With the experience of two years of the IGF, it is also the right time 
to revisit the role and the structure of the MAG. To start with, it will 
be useful to list out the functions that MAG is expected to perform.
• One function is of course to make all necessary arrangements for the 
annual IGF meetings. We must reviews MAG's experience with carrying out 
this function. What more needs to be done by MAG to further improve the 
effectiveness of the IGF? We are of the opinion that MAG must review its 
decision making processes to make them more effective. These are 
especially important if IGF is to evolve into something more than what 
it is today, to enable it to fulfill all aspects of its mandate.
• It will be very useful for the MAG to work through working groups 
(WGs). These WGs should prepare for each main session and the set of 
workshops connected to this main session. WGs can also be used for 
managing internal tasks of the MAG more effectively.
• We also seek greater clarity at this point about whether the MAG has 
any substantive identity other than advising the UN Secretary General. 
For instance, to carry out some part of the mandate which requires 
'interfacing', 'advising', identifying issues', 'giving recommendations' 
etc, MAG, in some form or the other, needs to be able to represent the 
IGF. It looks highly impractical that these tasks can cohere in the UN 
Secretary General.
• MAG should prepare an annual report for the IGF. This report should 
mention IGF activities and performance for the year against relevant 
parts of the Tunis Agenda which lays out its mandate, and also outline 
plans for the year ahead. We
suggest that this report, once adopted by the Secretary General, would 
also satisfy the requirements of paragraph 75 of the Tunis Agenda and 
prepare for discussion about the desirability of continuing the Forum 
beyond 2010.
• IGF should actively encourage regional and national level IGFs, which 
should be truly multi-stakeholder. A specific plan should be drawn out 
for this purpose, possibly using a MAG working group. Such a need is 
also expressed in the paragraph 80 of Tunis Agenda.
Funding of IGF, and Issues of Participation
The United Nations needs to recognise that the IGF is the outcome of a 
UN process and should ensure that it has the resources it needs to 
fulfill its mandate as defined at the Tunis Summit in 2005. We express 
our great respect and appreciation for the work of the IGF Secretariat. 
While severely under-funded it has still been responsible for many of 
the IGF's successes. The Secretariat should be provided with resources 
needed to perform its role effectively.
In addition, a fund should be established to support the participation 
of people from developing and least developed countries in the IGF 
annual meetings and the IGF preparatory consultations.

*Special Advisors and Chair*

The need for Special Advisors, their role in the MAG, and criteria for 
their selection should be clarified. Considerations of diversity, as 
mentioned above in case of MAG members, must also be kept in mind for 
the selection of Special Advisors. The number of Special Advisors should 
be kept within a reasonable limit.
We are of the opinion that in keeping with the multi-stakeholder nature 
of the MAG, there should only be one chair, nominated by the UN 
Secretary General. The host country should be able to nominate a deputy 
chair, an arrangement that would be helpful regarding logistical issues 
for the annul IGF meetings. In any case, we will like to understand the 
division of work and responsibility between the two chairs in the 
present arrangement? It may be too late to move over to the suggested 
new arrangement of one chair, plus a host country deputy chair, for the 
Hyderabad meeting, especially if the Indian government representative 
has already taken over as the co-chair, but we can take a decision now 
about the post-Hyderabad phase.
And lastly, the IG Caucus supports the continuation of the present 
Chair, Nitin Desai, as the Chair of the MAG. We recognize and commend 
the role that he has played in guiding the MAG and the IGF through 
difficult formative times

____________________________________________________________
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