[governance] Suggested statement on MAG's future

[Jeremy Malcolm]

On 04/05/2010, at 3:20 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:

> 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.
> 
> What does that mean, it is a formal appointment only. Have you, for example, asked the secretariat if they also regard this appointment as merely formal? I think you would be surprised.

I don't think I would at all; that was rather the reason for making that point. :-)  Having said that, Nitin Desai did once claim:

"the United Nations itself is not a player in Internet governance directly.  And to that extent, the Secretary-General is a disinterested party.  And to some extent I suppose somebody like me, who is his representative, is also seen as a disinterested party.  Not a representative of any particular stakeholder group.  But we have never thought of that as anything more than an interim measure till the thing stabilizes."

I wonder how soon after the IGF has stabilised, that the UN Secretariat will offer to cede control of it. :-)

> Also, I don't understand the meaning of "rightful" in this context. Is it supposed to mean what you or we find just or adequate? Then this should be made more clear.

It just means that per Tunis Agenda, Internet governance is to be "a transparent, democratic, and multilateral process, with the participation of governments, private sector, civil society and international organisations, in their respective roles".

> Many of these issues we have discussed before and I can only repeat my positions:
> 
> I don't think it is feasible and desirable for the stakeholders to choose their members for the MAG. We need somebody sorting out issues of regional and gender representation. Expertise is also an issue in this context.

There is no reason why criteria of regional and gender balance, etc, could not be taken into account by a stakeholder-composed nominating committee/s just as easily as they can by the UNSG.

> I am also not convinced that the MAG should get more authority. This would raise problems of legitimacy and most likely bring the equality between governments and other stakeholders in the MAG and the IGF in general to an end.

To have achieved equality in an organisation that has no power is rather a pyrrhic victory.  Since civil society has a measure of equality with other stakeholders in the IGF, we have a foot in the door and an excellent opportunity to incrementally widen it and thereby increase our influence on policy making for the Internet.

> Finally, the issue of transparency: The secretariat publishes a summary of the MAG's discussions as a response to the request for more transparency. If the caucus thinks this is not enough or doesn't do what we need, perhaps we should be more specific than just repeating what we have said for years?

It is not more specific because whenever more specific ideas have been proposed in the past (dual open+closed mailing lists, transcripts of meetings, etc), they have not met with consensus here.  We could just take out any reference to transparency, but I think in general it is a good idea for us to keep this issue alive even if we can't agree on concrete measures to improve it.

-- 
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