[governance] Review Panels

[Fouad Bajwa]

Dear Bertrand,

Anriette's question is very valid and when it will come down to review
panels, I would not deem them to be the best approach. The review
panels will have to be first lead with a multistakeholder but more
"involved group". We have the governments, the ICANN and the various
technical internet community and technology-non-technology Civil
Society. The review panels should be adopted with a more dynamic
approach and above all, a concrete team should be available above the
review panels to quickly note, review and disseminate.

One thing about IGF's approach that has confused me within the MAG as
well is its lack of interest to touch the policy side of things
whereas consensus and collaborative resolutions to issues, finding
solutions to problems and recommending through resolutions is a UN
mechanism then why cannot that be included as an exploration within
the IGF process.

The second thing I am more interested in is the institutionalization
of the IGF and acting as an umbrella facilitator than just a dialogue
facilitator (this is one area IGF has been very successful in) but
this model will only evolve if the IGF acts as an umbrella forum to
which every participating member country conducts a regional IGF and
contributes back to the main IGF. This is pretty nascent but I would
like the Review Panel to take institutionalization of the IGF into
account since if the IGF is continued, it should evolve into a much
more concrete role and other organizations like the ITU, UNGAID, CSTD,
UNESCO etc. should be involved in such a way that they can realize
that IGF is the right way to move instead of everyone trying to push
their ticket into the process and also realize that everyone is a
stakeholder of the Internet and IGF is a very powerful example that
everyone can move into the dialogue process and real actions can be
resolved to benefit the global internet citizenry at large.

One thing that intimidates alot is the over emphasis on ICANN and the
tug-of-war that exists within the minds of the stakeholders. Yes ICANN
is one part of the problem but we have to realize that ICANN is not
the convergence and convergence will reform its power structures and
one thing is there for the IGF to be present when it happens, that is,
when the name space opens up and as convergence continues to take
place, other forms of name space attributes are continuing to be
evolved through research and one day we will have a very different
name space structure and that future is not so far.

The role of the Review Panels has to be very dynamic bringing its
members in an equal level and a very fast and efficient process
because Internet Governance will continue to evolve therefore why
should the review process be slower on a fast moving bullet technology
train?



On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Bertrand de La Chapelle
<bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do
> you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is
> facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a
> multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently
> diverse, balanced and representative of the variety of viewpoints ?
>
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> snip
>>
>> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>> the process likely to be?
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
> Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
> and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
> Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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