[governance] CSTD Representatives - report from NomCom

Ian Peter ian.peter at ianpeter.com
Sat Oct 30 15:35:51 EDT 2010


Hi Imran,

Good questions! But these are for the IGC as a whole, not the Nomcom to
answer.

Ian


> From: Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com>
> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 03:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>, Adam
> Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
> Cc: <imran at uisoc.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] CSTD Representatives - report from NomCom
> 
> Dear Ian
> Congratulation to the selected representatives of IGC for CSTD.
> 
> With reference to following discussion,
> may I ask some questions:
> 1. Although these nominated members of IGC are independent to give their
> opinion about IGF
> to CSTD but what will be the IGC mandate for them?
> 2. Will they obtain consensus of IGC members before submitting their reports
> to CSTD?
> 3. if some one know the reason of for the review, they should understand the
> requirement as well.
> 4. What are the probability to give only one statement at the end of the day
> that "Everything in going excellent, IGF is working as per charter of the UN".
> 
> Regads
> 
> Imran
> 
> On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 08:02 PKT Ian Peter wrote:
> 
>> Hi Adam,
>> 
>> We did not formally adopt a position on this suggestion. But I do know that
>> this was considered by Nomcom members in their individual thinking on the
>> matter and was raised as a consideration during our processes. However it
>> was not one of our formal selection criteria.
>> 
>> Speaking personally, I do not think that being a MAG representative of civil
>> society would make a person less capable of independently assessing its
>> value and impact. Indeed it might even allow me a more thorough perspective.
>> 
>> Ian
>> 
>> 
>>> From: Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
>>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
>>> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 11:46:05 +0900
>>> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [governance] CSTD Representatives - report from NomCom
>>> 
>>> Ian, thank you and thank you to the NomCom.
>>> 
>>> Your criteria:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Regular contributor to IGC
>>>> 2. Consultative style with IGC members
>>>> 3. Knowledge of/ previous experience with CSTD
>>>> 4. Knowledge of the UN system
>>>> 5. Able to represent the diverse range of views and perspectives held by
>>>> civil society
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I suggested, and a couple of people I think
>>> supported, that it would not be a good idea to
>>> have current MAG members and advisors to the MAG
>>> chair as members of the CSTD working group.  I
>>> think the reasons self-evident: It is not good
>>> practise to have people examining their own work.
>>> The MAG itself will be a subject of discussion.
>>> The MAG has of course been one of the main
>>> entities in shaping the IGF.  Self review is not
>>> good practise.
>>> 
>>> One would think interviewing current and past MAG
>>> members and advisors would be a priority, having
>>> them as members of the working group, not.
>>> 
>>> It also potentially gives those who object to the
>>> IGF reason to criticize the outcomes of the
>>> working group.
>>> 
>>> Just wondering if the NomCom considered this and have any opinions.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Adam
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On behalf of the Nomcom, I can now announce that the following were chosen
>>>> as  IGC civil society nominations to CSTD, and we would ask that the co ­
>>>> ordinators deal with forwarding the names to CSTD in due course. Our report
>>>> follows the names (which are in no particular order).
>>>> 
>>>> Anriette Esterhuysen
>>>> Parminder Singh
>>>> Michael Gurstein
>>>> Wolfgang Kleinwachter
>>>> Izumi Aizu
>>>> Katitza Rodriguez 
>>>> Marilia Maciel
>>>> William J Drake
>>>> Divina Frau-Meigs
>>>> Milton Mueller
>>>> 
>>>> Should any of the chosen reps be unavailable, the NomCom can advise its
>>>> preferences for alternative candidates. Indeed a number of other candidates
>>>> figured strongly in our thinking and it is a pity we were not able to
>>>> include them all.
>>>> 
>>>> REPORT
>>>> 
>>>> The Nomcom was briefed  on October 20, and asked to complete this task by
>>>> October 31 ­ a very tight timeframe. The members selected were Qusai
>>>> Al-Shatti, Gurumurthy K, Hempal Shrestha, Jacquiline Morris  and Ian Peter.
>>>> Ian Peter was  elected Chair for the purpose of this exercise.
>>>> 
>>>> Our first step was to call for nominations to be clarified or added to
>>>> (original nominations were made in conjunction with the co coordinator
>>>> ballot on October 10).
>>>> 
>>>> A final list of candidates was published on governance list on October 24
>>>> as
>>>> follows
>>>> 
>>>> Jeremy Malcolm, Tim McGinnis , Anupam Agrawal , Rafik Dammak , Mohamed
>>>> Zahran , Cheryl Langdon-Orr , Jamil Goheer , Wolfgang Kleinwächter, Imran
>>>> Ahmed Shah , AHM Bazlur Rahman , William J. Drake, Izumi Aizu , Michael
>>>> Gurstein , Divina Frau-Meigs , Baudouin Schombe , Fearghas McKay, Hakikur
>>>> Rahman, Solomon Gizaw , Fouad Bajwa , Kwasi Adu-Boahen Opare, Pascal Bekono
>>>> , Milton L. Mueller, Vittorio Bertola , Shahzad Ahmad, Katitza Rodriguez,
>>>> Julian Casasbuenas G, Hong Xue, Hanane Boujemi, Jeremy Hunsinger , Vivek
>>>> Misra, Marília Maciel , Sivasubramanian M , Carlos Watson, Parminder Jeet
>>>> Singh, Anriette Esterhuysen.
>>>> 
>>>> Late nominations were also received from Anja Kovacs, Roland Perry, and
>>>> Mohamed Zahran. The applications submitted after the closing dates were
>>>> also
>>>> examined by the NonCom. However, none of them could make it to the final
>>>> list.
>>>> 
>>>> In addition to selecting the 10 candidates to represent the civil society
>>>> Internet Governance Caucus, the IGC Nomcom was asked to consider an
>>>> informal
>>>> request to include representatives of the "technical community".
>>>> We have not done so specifically, because the request was informal and we
>>>> do
>>>> not believe it is appropriate in the spirit of multi stakeholderism for our
>>>> group to try to represent the wishes of a separate stakeholder group. And
>>>> while we would point out that among the names we are forwarding are people
>>>> with long standing involvement in and knowledge of Internet technical and
>>>> governance bodies, it is not up to us to formally attempt representation
>>>> for
>>>> these bodies in reponse to an informal request from some other party to do
>>>> so. We believe a direct approach by CSTD to bodies such as the NRO and ISOC
>>>> from CSTD would be more appropriate.
>>>> 
>>>> Some private correspondence was undertaken with representatives of ISOC and
>>>> RIRs before arriving at this position, and we believe it is the appropriate
>>>> response for all parties concerned in the circumstances. No names were
>>>> submitted by these bodies for Nomcom consideration.
>>>> 
>>>> The  group defined its selection criteria for IGC representation as
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Regular contributor to IGC
>>>> 2. Consultative style with IGC members
>>>> 3. Knowledge of/ previous experience with CSTD
>>>> 4. Knowledge of the UN system
>>>> 5. Able to represent the diverse range of views and perspectives held by
>>>> civil society
>>>> 
>>>> The group also decided that it would consider both geographic and gender
>>>> diversity in determining its final slate from among the most supported
>>>> candidates.
>>>> 
>>>> Nomcom members then scored candidates individually and each nomcom member
>>>> who participated came up with a list of 10 names. These were collated ,
>>>> with
>>>> the majority of candidates on our final list being initially selected by
>>>> all
>>>> participating nomcom members. The Nomcom then discussed finalisation of the
>>>> slate and the merits of respective candidates, bearing in mind geographic
>>>> and gender balance as much as possible to come up with a final list.
>>>> This was a very tight timeframe. Nomcom members worked very well together
>>>> and with a great deal of agreement on how to proceed to bring this to a
>>>> successful conclusion in a tight timeframe.
>>>> 
>>>> Finally, we must add that the slate of candidates available for selection
>>>> was extraordinarily good, and representative of the diverse talents within
>>>> the Internet Governance Caucus. While on this occasion, for the purposes of
>>>> CSTD representation, the Nomcom clearly wanted to ensure that some of IGC¹s
>>>> more experienced members were involved, we would like to stress that for
>>>> future tasks, such as MAG rotation, different criteria would apply and we
>>>> would like to see more people having the opportunity to represent IGC. So
>>>> we
>>>> would encourage unsuccessful nominees on this occasion to put their names
>>>> forward again in the future and thank them for their offer to contribute on
>>>> this occasion.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Ian Peter
>>>> On behalf of Nomcom
>>>> 
>>>> PS - and as a personal note - we were only able to deliver a slate of
>>>> candidates in this short period of time because of the calibre of the
>>>> participating Nomcom members. Although the timeframe did not allow the
>>>> participation of Qasai, I must say that Jacquiline, Guru and Hempal all
>>>> displayed high level abilities to hear each other perspectives and
>>>> compromise in order to get a result. It is not easy to undertake such an
>>>> exercise in such a short time frame but the participating Nomcom members
>>>> took to the task and did a wonderful job for IGC.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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


More information about the Governance mailing list