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

[linda misek-falkoff]

*----- respectful interfaces e-memo Jeremy 011610 -----*

Dear Jeremy, and greetings All:

Thank you so much for undertaking this robust position statement for us and
everyone concerned.

A suggestion is that while it is great to show a variety of positions and
approaches, you might consider replacing the sense of dissent at some points
with a sense of "additionally."
This could serve to re-unify the *persona* conveyed, and really at the heart
of things we are essentially in unity.

Again, much appreciated, Linda M F.

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> 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.
>
> --
> 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. 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




-- 
- - - - -
LDMF.
Dr. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff
> 914 769 3652
> law /  computing / humanities:
> Founder/Director *Respectful Interfaces*;
> Member, Board, Secretary (Officer) - Communications Coordination Committee
for the
> U.N.;
> World Education Fellowship;
> Member Committees on disability, aging, health, values, development;
> President, National Disability Party (NDP); Steering Seat, International
Disability Caucus;
> Persons with Pain Intl., co-founded with Carol J. Levy;
> ICT multiple decades;
> Other affiliations on Request.
>
> n.b.:

> -  You are welcome to join *Respectful Interfaces.* The *Respectful
> Interfaces* Coda is: "Achieving Dialogue While Cherishing Diversity" (ask
> about event or continuing leadership interning).

> - Communication, Cooperation and Collaboration are core values of the
CCC/UN.


P.S. While still in initial development -  you are welcome to visit the
startup (not yet with alternative text or captioning) *Respectful
Interfaces* website  - in order to browse, make requests, join in, and send
suggestions to  respectful.interfaces at gmail.com.  To sample *respectful
Interfaces* as an enterprise framework, with references to CCC/UN and WEF,
click here: http://wp.me/PFqR6-K
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100116/3c145e37/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