[governance] IGC statement REVISION 2.0: any further comments?

Fri Jan 15 15:08:20 EST 2010

(it is my belief and hope that the majority of the fine people working in this field are well intentioned. That demands are unnecessary. That in most cases, reminding or bringing to attention important issues will result in good conscious efforts to do right.)

Final thought on final paragraph.  

 We thank you for the opportunity to present you with these thoughts, which reflect a "rough consensus" of our several hundred members from civil society, with a wide spread of geographic and gender representation. Most importantly we believe that the areas of concern addressed herein are worthy of constant review, debate and contribution and should not be ignored or overlooked in this area of great importance.  We look forward to continuing to constructively engage with and participate in the IGF over the course of its renewed term.

Believe can be changed to: support the idea 
Debate and contibution can be taken out
"Should not" can be changed to the affirmative / should be paid attention to
--- On Fri, 1/15/10, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

From: Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu>
Subject: Re: [governance] IGC statement REVISION 2.0: any further comments?
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Jeremy Malcolm" <jeremy at ciroap.org>
Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 6:12 PM

Hi Jeremy, thanks for posting an updated version. You did not include Ian's comments did you?

I have more issues with the text, I just havn't posted them yet since I thought we would proceed para by para.

jeanette

Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> *Submission of the IGC in taking stock of the Sharm el Sheikh meeting of the IGF*
> 
> The Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) strongly supports the continuation of the IGF as a multi-stakeholder forum for the discussion of Internet-related public policy issues.  However if, as we hope, the forum's mandate is to be extended for a further term, there are a number of adjustments that we believe should be taken into account, continuing the IGF's pattern of incremental improvement since its inauguration in 2006.  None of these suggestions would fundamentally alter the IGF as an institution; thus for example, we believe it should remain formally convened by the UN Secretary General, with an independent budget and a Secretariat under contract with the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA).
> 
> One question on which the IGC is in clear agreement is that the composition of the MAG itself should be more evenly divided between the stakeholder groups, rather than being slanted towards particular stakeholder groups as it is at present.  Many also believe that the stakeholders should have a more direct role in the selection of MAG members, and that MAG discussions should be more transparent - for example, perhaps it could revisit the idea of a second, open mailing list, on which the MAG and Secretariat can discuss their operations publicly.
> 
> One particular aspect of the IGF's operations in which the participation of stakeholders could be improved is in the making of decisions relating to the IGF's structure and processes.  Many of the IGC's members believe that the MAG, drawing on input received at open consultation meetings, ought to exercise a greater influence than in the past on decisions about the future structure and processes of the IGF.
> 
> A second aspect in which there is room for further improvement in the accountability of the IGF to its stakeholders is in setting the substantive agenda of IGF meetings.  Although at present this responsibility falls to the MAG, the IGC was surprised that for instance the very strongly and widely expressed views of stakeholders from civil society as to the importance of a human rights agenda for the IGF was not reflected in the agenda set by the MAG for the Sharm el Sheikh meeting.
> 
> The IGC also believes that the IGF ought to improve its orientation towards the development of tangible outputs, even if these do not amount to recommendations, declarations or statements (though many of our members would support outputs of such kinds).  Whatever form its outputs take, efforts should be taken to ensure that they are transmitted to relevant external institutions, either by the MAG directly, through publications on the IGF's Web site, or through the media as appropriate.
> 
> Similarly, there is a strong view within the IGC that in order to maximise its effectiveness, the IGF should have an intersessional work program, rather than being limited to a single annual meeting.  Many of our members believe that this should include the development of an ongoing work program for the IGF as a whole, to be carried on through online tools and intersessional and regional meetings.
> 
> Others believe that the main responsibility for intersessional work can be left to dynamic coalitions (and perhaps other issue-specific working groups).  In that case, it is widely accepted that there should be a better mechanism than at present for these groups to present their outputs to the IGF as a whole.  This would require the IGF to begin to set more stringent standards for such groups, including open membership, democratic processes, and perhaps multi-stakeholder composition.
> 
> We thank you for the opportunity to present you with these thoughts, which reflect a "rough consensus" of our several hundred members from civil society, with a wide spread of geographic and gender representation.  We look forward to continuing to constructively engage with and participate in the IGF over the course of its renewed term.
> 
> *About the IGC*
> 
> The IGC is an association of individuals in civil society who are actively engaged in internet governance and the IGF. Formed during the lead up to the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), our mission is to promote global public interest objectives in Internet governance policy making. It now comprises more than 400 individual subscribers to its mailing list, who have subscribed to its Charter.  More about our coalition can be found at http://www.igcaucus.org <http://www.igcaucus.org/>.
> 
> -- 
> *Jeremy Malcolm
> Project Coordinator*
> Consumers International
> Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
> 
> *CI is 50*
> Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer movement in 2010.
> Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect consumer rights around the world. _http://www.consumersinternational.org/50_
> 
> Read our email confidentiality notice <http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765>. Don't print this email unless necessary.
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100115/fd01f96e/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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t