[governance] IISD comment on the draft

[Meryem Marzouki]

Dear all,

I agree with part of what Heather said, in summary that IGC cannot  
claim to represent neither the whole CS @ IGF, nor, a fortiori, the  
whole CS in general.
However, one should take into account the fact that the IGC, while  
being far from perfect - and, as someone who raised the point many  
times, I'm very comfortable saying so - is not simply one CSO like  
any other @ IGF. To start with, it includes people (and NGO  
representatives) with different views on IG, and in that sense it is  
very different from one single NGO with identified views and objectives.

CONGO is not an option, at least not without a serious discussion.  
Not only because of the reasons Lee provided (participation of  
individuals as well), but also because this would mean a change in  
the IGC, as well as the IGF functioning and especially the MAG's  
role. I don't know if this option was discussed inside the MAG  
already, but I really see this suggestion would constitute a radical  
political turn, which objectives would need to be clarified and  
discussed. But not now, we have to finalize the document first.

What we need to discuss is the possibility to set up a kind of "CS  
plenary", like we had during WSIS (and that worked pretty well),  
where all individuals, NGOs, other kind of CSO groups, and maybe  
their grouping into thematic caucuses can interact. But this, again,  
is a long term discussion, and our priority now is to finalize the  
document.

As for now, my opinion is that, following Jeremy's proposal below, we  
might change the wordings so that the document takes into account  
Heather's concern (which are very much valid) and at the same time  
doesn't radically downsize IGC feature, role and achievements to that  
of any NGO or CSO. Above all, the document shouldn't come at this  
step with any alternative, like CONGO or any other. There is no need  
to hurry in this document with a definitive architecture for CS  
representation at IGF. Let's be cautious here, let's leave the door  
open, while asking for some change.

Best,
Meryem

Le 7 oct. 10 à 05:20, Jeremy Malcolm a écrit :

> On 06/10/2010, at 11:58 PM, Heather Creech wrote:
>
>> I want to raise concern about one specific point in the draft,  
>> which falls under question 2.  This concerns the relationship  
>> between the IGC, civil society concerned with internet  
>> governance / the IGF, and civil society in general.
>>
>> The draft suggests that:  "With its existing open, accountable,  
>> transparent and democratic processes, the Internet Governance  
>> Caucus could form the foundation of an appropriate body to select  
>> civil society MAG representatives, subject to appropriate criteria  
>> to ensure regional and gender balance and a diversity of  
>> viewpoints."  It adds that this could also be achieved through an  
>> independent NomCom process.
>
> It was in anticipation of concerns such as yours that I worded it  
> "could form the foundation of an appropriate body to select" rather  
> than just "could select".  I consider that this is a fair statement  
> of an appropriate role for the IGC within a potentially broader  
> civil society coalition, in that we have much greater expertise and  
> interest in IG issues than >90% of the NGOs who are active in  
> CONGO.  But, please suggest specific wording that would further  
> clarify the IGC's role.
>
> -- 
> 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/20101007/01da1a0b/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