[governance] SECOND DRAFT suggested statement on MAG's future

[Imran Ahmed Shah]

Dear Members of UN/IGF and IGC
 
With reference to the “SECOND DRAFT suggested statement on MAG's future”, please find a proposal for the reorganization of the membership of Internet Governance Forum for open discussion and consensus:
 
Instead of single group as MAG, I suggest at least three multi-stakeholder groups in IGF to discuss issues related to Internet
governance:-

1. Group A:
Representation of Governments of all Member Countries/Territories of the United Nations. 
They will also be helpful for the implementation of the UN/IGF Policies, given guide-lines for rules and regulations (in their countries) and to arrange to provide Funds required for Implementation (IGF+ICT Policies) in context of Internet Governance. 

2. Group B:
Representations of Technology Experts and Policy Implementer(s) from the Commercial and Non-Commercial Organizations, Institutions, Groups or Civil/Social Societies. 
They will not only help to prepare best policies but also extend the policies and implementation process in the community up to the end user (public: citizen or netizen). 

3. Group C:
Representatives of Public, Civil/Social Societies/Communities or Individuals as a User, where the IGF Policies Implementation will have direct impact. 

Proposed membership ratio is 30%+30%+40% respectively.

The members of IGC may become part of these groups.

These three groups may have:

Tree different mailing List + Discussion Forum
and 
One common mailing list and Discussion Forum

These groups will participate for policies development and implementation for Internet Governance.

There should be some positions of Directors & Chairman/President of the Groups and coordinators at UN/IGF and who will be permanently based at IGF Office.  

Membership of these Groups may become open for all when this model is approved by the UNSG. 

I hope that this proposed framework may resolve many issues and will have a very positive impact on the UN/IGF fundamental theme. At this stage forum “has no decision-making authority” or feedback implementation mechanism of the open discussions and consensus made at IGC/IGF forum which may be referred as “top to bottom influence of the internet governance policies“. This will also provide a decision making mechanism and implementation process through the representatives of the Governments, Private and Public Sectors.  



Thanking you
 
Best Regards

Imran Ahmed Shah

[ICANNian since Oct'09]
[+92 300 4130617]
Advisor to 
Urdu Internet Council
Urdu Internet Society
________________________________

From: Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Sent: Thu, 6 May, 2010 7:29:37
Subject: [governance] SECOND DRAFT suggested statement on MAG's future

This incorporates Yrjö's changes in place of the original paragraph 3, and moves some contested passages into [square brackets].  Additions will appear underlined in rich text email clients.

--- 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 recognised by the Tunis Agenda as the joint sovereigns of Internet governance.  The MAG has shown the feasibility and positive effects of non-bureau like structures.  We would therefore like to see the democratic legitimacy 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 2010 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.]

The roles of the UNSG and MAG in controlling the IGF process should be re-examined in the light of he relevant articles of the Tunis agenda and of the IGF experience so far. While the UNSG has the overall authority over the IGF in terms of convening it (§72, §74), reporting on its operation (§75) and examining the desirability of its continuation (§76), the IGF in its working and function, will be multilateral,multi-stakeholder, democratic and transparent (§73). In post-Tunis practice, the MAG has evolved into the main actor managing the actual "working and function" of the IGF, ensuring "the complementarity between all stakeholders involved in this process - governments, business entities, civil society and intergovernmental organizations" (§73a)

In underlining this, the appropriate role of the MAG, as the only representative body 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.  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 ---

-- 
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100505/e9314871/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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