[governance] IGF consultative process - request for comments

[Fouad Bajwa]

Hi Jeremy and Everyone,

Thank you for taking this up because the MAG improvements was an
important matter that was raised during many discussions and this is
the opportunity to create those much required improvements.

However, I would like to point out one of the most critical issues
raised and clarified that despite there are three clear stakeholder
members of the multistakeholderism, that is, governments, private
sector and civil society, still, no one body is representative of all
the stakeholders in that particular stakeholder group. This means that
in Civil Society, IGC is one of the members but is not the whole
representative of the group and there are other Civil Society members
outside the IGC participating in the IGF process. Similarly, within
the Private Sector, ICC-International Chambers of Commerce is one of
the members of the group but does not represent the whole group and
there are may other private sector members, thus, for the Governments,
you can understand that there are various government members and one
government does not represent the whole government group of the
multistakeholderism.

Keeping this in view, when we discuss, choose, approve with consensus
and forward our comments, we will have to bear in mind that within
Civil Society, there will be many other
members/organizations/technical groups that will be giving comments on
their own and will not necessarily reflect IGC's views and the balance
that the IGF Secretariat might strike is to be take into consideration
views of all participating/commenting stakeholders. This is that
crucial point that will effect the working of the MAG with either
improvements or certain much awaited changes for the next 5 years if
the IGF mandate is renewed. Therefore we must take a critical (be sure
and in consensus about the changes we want) and balanced approach
(keep in view that we as IGC are not the only members in the Civil
Society group of the multistakeholderism).

I am bringing these points into consideration because I have felt from
my experience that it was a long struggle for all of us to initiate
the very very small process of change and innovation amidst must
resistance within the IGF but it couldn't have been done alone without
convincing many of the members of other stakeholder groups to see the
significant impacts of such dialogue such as IG4D Internet Governance
for Development might create for all stakeholders.

With us all very hopeful that the mandate will be renewed, we must
grasp, use and achieve through this opportunity the most pressing
needs and changes. If we request that MAG nominations should be
improved, it should be taken into notice that all the other
members/groups in the Civil Society will also have an equal nomination
say and that IGC's nominations will not necessarily be the only
determining point of selection of MAG members from Civil Society as
IGC is only one member of that many members of the Civil Society
group. So we will have to be very pragmatic.

-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa


On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> For those who have not yet read the notes of the MAG meeting to which Fouad
> posted a link yesterday, there was an important announcement of a new IGF
> consultative process:
>
> This discussion in the MAG meeting was the first step of a broad based IGF
> consultative process. As a next step, the Secretariat would put out a
> Request of Comments on the following questions:
> (a) Has the work of the MAG been consistent with the mandate set out in the
> Tunis Agenda and subsequent decisions?
> (b) How best to nominate non-governmental members for the MAG?
> (c) How best to nominate the MAG Chair?
> (d) How best to organize open consultations?
> (e) How best to link with regional meetings?
> (f) How best to link with international processes and institutions?
>
> This will tie in well with our current discussions on the list about the IGF
> as a venue for developing globally-applicable public policy principles.
> In the spirit of innovative working methods, Ginger and I will work on how
> to best gather the IGC's collective thoughts for this consultative process.
> --
>
> 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