[governance] the matter of MAG rotation 2010

[Jeanette Hofmann]

Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <4B54407A.4030602 at wzb.eu>, at 11:05:30 on Mon, 18 Jan 2010, 
> Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> writes
> 
>> As we perhaps all know by now, the MAG doesn't have any formal 
>> authority. Decisions are taken by the UNSG, and this is where, in my 
>> view, accountability for the IGF lies.
> 
> Perhaps some people confuse the MAG with the concept of a "Bureau" 
> originally mentioned in the Tunis Agenda.
> 
> Does the MAG even present an independently negotiated consensus (as a 
> deliverable) to UNSG, or is it a set of independent views from which 
> UNSG draws a conclusion?

The way it usually works is that the chair sends report to New York 
which summarizes the discussions of the MAG. The report is part of the 
black box. We don't know exactly how the chair summarizes the debates 
and what he recommends the UNSG to do. However, the concluding remarks 
of the chair probably give a good picture of his take on certain issues.

I feel somewhat uneasy about this procedure because it depends to a 
large extent on the integrity of the chair. Should the MAG get a chair 
with a less developed sense of fairness and balance, this type of 
black-boxed process wouldn't work at all. On the other hand, 
black-boxing part of the process was important in the early stage of the 
MAG when its membership couldn't agree on much. The chair's reports 
helped to find compromises and somehow strengthened the trust in the 
process.

jeanette
____________________________________________________________
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