[governance] Suggested statement on MAG's future

[McTim]

Hi,

On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> Ginger and I have been silent on the drafting of a statement on the future
> of the MAG for its meeting on the 12th, in the hope that such a statement
> would emerge from the bottom up, but in order not to let the opportunity
> slip, allow me now to propose some text for discussion.  There are six
> paragraphs.  If you have an issue, please state which paragraph is of
> concern, and please make your suggestions as focussed as possible.
> --- begins ---
> The Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) supports the maintenance of
> the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) of the Internet Governance Forum
> (IGF), as the body that links the UN Secretariat to the stakeholder groups
> that are the joint sovereigns of Internet governance.

I don't see "stakeholder groups" as joint sovereigns of IG.


 We would like to see
> the democratic legitimacy

Is the MAG supposed to be a democratic body?

 and effectiveness of the MAG strengthened as it
> continues into a renewed term for the IGF.
> To this end, in our statement for the February open consultation and MAG
> meetings, the IGC suggested that the composition of the MAG itself should be
> more evenly divided between the stakeholder groups.  We also reported that
> many 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.
> We also consider that care must be taken in balancing the respective roles
> of the Secretariat and the MAG.  Whilst the United Nations Secretary-General
> is the titular leader of the IGF process, this is a formal appointment only.
>  Rightful control of the IGF as a process or institution of Internet
> governance belongs ultimately to the stakeholders themselves.  Therefore,
> the Secretariat's role ought to remain a purely facilitative and technical
> one.
> In underlining this, the appropriate role of the MAG, as the only
> representative body

Is it a representative body?  I thought that MAG members acted in
personal capacities, no?

 of the stakeholders within the IGF process, becomes
> clear.  Namely, it should be responsible for every decision that effects the
> substantive work of the IGF.

Individual stakeholders, working in cooperation should be responsible
for decision making.

Is there substantive work of the IGF?


  This includes agenda setting, overseeing the
> preparation of briefing and synthesis documents, and reshaping the IGF's
> structure and working methods (such as the establishment of thematic working
> groups).
> In the future, its role may go further still.  Until now, the IGF has been
> largely just a forum for discussion.  Looking to the future, the
> Secretary-General's report on the continuation of the IGF envisages that it
> may come to produce some form of recommendations.  If so, the MAG will have
> a role in supporting that process too, likely in shaping the content of any
> statements that are to be issued in conformity with the consensus of the
> plenary forum.
> Whatever the future may hold for the IGF, the MAG will be integral to it.
>  This is why it is so important that the composition of the MAG is balanced,
> that the process of selection of its members satisfies the stakeholder
> groups from which they are drawn, that its operations are conducted with a
> high degree of transparency in order to ensure its accountability to the
> stakeholders at large, and that its legitimate role is not usurped.
> --- ends ---
> Perhaps time is too short for us to agree on this statement (extending the
> delay, I'm writing while away without Internet access), but let's try and
> see how far we get.


Like Jeannette, I am also not "convinced" that the MAG should get more
authority.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
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