[governance] CSTD Representatives - report from NomCom

Sat Oct 30 21:57:01 EDT 2010

First of all, big thanks should go to Ian and everybody at the Nomcom for
carrying out this task in a smooth and transparent manner, in such a short
period of time.

Secondly, I would like to congratulate Nomcom for taking into account
regional and gender balance. I do believe that the WG can be enriched by
increasing its diversity.

I would also like to thank you for the trust you have put in me. It is a
great responsibility and I will do my very best to constructively contribute
to the discussions in the WG, if I happen to get chosen to be part of it at
the end of the process.

Imran raised some important points on the “mandate” of IGC representatives.
Although some things will certainly be discussed on the spot, probably
without time for consultation, I believe it is extremely important to be
based on IGC´s main positions. There are contributions and statements
produced and a collation of the main ones could be interesting. It is also
important to have constant communication and accountability.

Just some initial thoughts.

Best wishes,

Marília

On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

> 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
>

-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101030/9dbe7936/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