[governance] [Re-post] Consensus call on IGC statement: please

[Anja Kovacs]

Yes + thematic working groups.

Anja

On Sunday 31 January 2010 12:09 AM, Deirdre Williams wrote:
> YES + Thematic working groups
> 
> I would also like to state formally a concern about the sentence:
>> One question on which the IGC is in clear agreement is that the composition
>> of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) itself should be more evenly
>> divided between the stakeholder groups.
> as I was prepared to accept the evidence offered for an existing
> reasonably even distribution.
> 
> Deirdre
> 
> On 29 January 2010 08:03, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>> Reposted as previously, with minor changes as follows:
>> * one sentence struck out (or in double square brackets if your mail client
>> does not show striking out)
>> * one added paragraph underlined (or in single square brackets if your mail
>> client does not show underlining)
>> Please vote:
>> YES + thematic working groups to accept the statement as shown here
>> YES to accept the statement without underlined passage
>> NO to reject the statement
>> 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 Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as a multi-stakeholder forum for the
>> discussion of Internet-related public policy issues.  When, as we expect,
>> the forum's mandate is 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; for example, we are content that it 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).  We do not see any benefit to the IGF in moving underneath a
>> different UN body such as the ITU.
>> One question on which the IGC is in clear agreement is that the composition
>> of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) itself should be more evenly
>> divided between the stakeholder groups.  Many also believe that the
>> stakeholders should have a more direct role in the selection of MAG members,
>> and that MAG discussions should continue to be made more transparent.
>> 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.  We understand that the MAG might not be rotated this year (though
>> in our view the uncertainty about the IGF's future need not preclude that).
>>  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.  [[The IGC is ready to make innovative contributions to enhance the
>> present "Secretariat-MAG-Open Consultation" mechanism for the preparation of
>> IGF meetings.]]
>> The IGF should also consider how to improve its orientation towards the
>> development of tangible outputs, even if these would amount to "messages"
>> rather than to recommendations, declarations or statements (though many of
>> our members would also support outputs of these stronger kinds).  Whatever
>> form its outputs take, efforts should be taken to ensure that they are
>> transmitted to relevant external institutions through appropriate
>> mechanisms.
>> Similarly, attention must be given to the effectiveness of the IGF's
>> intersessional work program, which is currently limited to open
>> consultations, MAG meetings, dynamic coalition meetings, and loosely
>> connected national and regional meetings.  In particular, there should be a
>> better mechanism than at present for these other groups and meetings to
>> present their outputs to the IGF as a whole.  This would require the IGF to
>> set more stringent standards for such groups and meetings, including open
>> membership, democratic processes, and perhaps multi-stakeholder composition.
>> [The MAG should also organize thematic working groups 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.  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, with a wide
>> spread of geographic and gender representation, 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
>>
> 
> 
> 

____________________________________________________________
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