[governance] IGC statement FINAL VERSION

[Parminder]

Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>>
>> 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.  
> 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.
>
> 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
I dont think a MAG meeting in Sept would have resolved the issue. 
However, would it not have given us further opportunities to strategise 
and argue and negotiate on the issue, and on other issues we seek to put 
on agenda? That is the point. Holding fully-empowered MAG allows 
political issues to be tabled, negotiated around and possibly brought on 
to the agenda. CS advocacy and strategies are never a one-off thing, 
they are long struggles. And every occasion to take this struggle 
forward is useful.

So, the real issue is whether we want all the MAG meetings we get or 
not. I think Jeremy is trying to make this point using the background of 
the canceled MAG meeting of Sept 2009, which some people suspect, only 
suspect, just may have had something to do with ardent human rights 
advocacy taken up by CS groups in the 2009 preparatory process. However, 
since this is just a conjecture of some, I am fine if our statement 
de-links the two issues. we can say something like.

 "In this regard, we find it important that all the three annual MAG 
meetings are held so that important issues of agenda can be decided, and 
fine-tuned to the necessary level of detail, through taking note of open 
consultations and discussion among MAG members. "

Parminder




>
>
>
> 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
>
____________________________________________________________
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