[governance] IGC statement FINAL VERSION

[Jeanette Hofmann]

> One particular aspect of the IGF's operations in which the participation 
> of stakeholders could be improved 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.
> 
> It is perceived that this was partly due to the cancellation of the 
> September MAG meeting, in favour of an open planning session, ahead of 
> the IGF meeting in Sharm el Sheikh.  

I have objections with the above sentence. All MAG members who 
participated in the May meeting should know better. We cannot talk about 
details in public  but even a glance at the transcript of the open 
consultation should make it clear that there was strong disagreement 
among MAG members in Spring 2009 on the 2009 agenda. A formal MAG 
meeting in September would not have solved these issues.

The link between the open planning session in September and the 
substance of the 2009 agenda is, in my eyes, completely unfounded. The 
minimum I would thus ask for is that the sentence above says "It is 
perceived by some". I certainly don't perceive it that way and I am very 
surprised that others who participated in these meetings do.

jeanette



In this context, we have an
> observation to make about the proposal that there should be only one MAG 
> meeting in 2010.  The fact that a formal decision is yet to be taken on 
> whether the IGF is to be renewed and in what form is not seen by the IGC 
> as a decisive factor against the rotation.  However if a rotation does 
> not take place, care must be taken that this does not result in the 
> programme for the Vilnius meeting being prematurely set in stone.
> 
> On this note, we would like to re-propose the adoption of a human rights 
> agenda for the Vilnius meeting, along with the inclusion of 
> a development agenda in Internet governance as a cross cutting theme.
> 
> The IGF should also consider how 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 through appropriate mechanisms.
> 
> Similarly, in order to maximise its effectiveness, the IGF should have 
> an intersessional work program, rather than being limited to a single 
> annual meeting.  This could 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.
> 
> Alternatively the main responsibility for intersessional work could 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.
> 
> The MAG should also organize thematic working groups of MAG members plus 
> outsiders, to develop background material, IGF discussion synthesis etc 
> on major themes selected to be taken up by the IGF.
> 
> 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