[governance] MAG Selection [URGENT]
Marilia Maciel
mariliamaciel at gmail.com
Fri Feb 3 08:23:16 EST 2012
Hi Anriette,
I totally agree with you. This was one of the points that Carlos Affonso
and I raised on the paper we wrote to APC about challenges for CS
participation. We did some research about why tech and academic were
grouped together, but I would love to hear the background story from Bill ;)
Anyway, the important thing is that we propose it and the representatives
of the technical & academic community in the WG did agree that it would be
the bast way to go.
I searched Peter's older document and the proposal is there: "Stakeholder
groups should strive for geographic diversity, gender balance, and
developing country representation. Stakeholder groups should also strive to
reflect their internal diversity separating technical community and
academic community", so I just probably missed the last part of the
sentence when I pasted it.
Marília
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>wrote:
> Dear Marilia
>
> Thanks for posting this text from the WG report... one proposal that we
> had made in the WG, which I don't see reflected in the current draft
> text, is that we increase civil society representation through treating
> the technical community and the academic community as two distinct
> stakeholder groups, each entitled to its own representatives.
>
> Bill can explain the history of how the rather fuzzy 'technical and
> academic' category developed...
>
> But my concern is that currently civil society is having to share our
> 'places' between civil society organisations and individual civil
> society activists from the academic community. I am not at all unhappy
> about us doing this as many people who are academics are also active in
> civil society, and they add a lot of value to multi-stakeholder
> processes... but I think we need and deserve to have both groups
> represented separately. Currently civil society is under-represented in
> the MAG and I believe it is essential to change this.
>
> If the academic community is treated as a category in its own right we
> would then have the following non-governmental stakeholder groups
> represented in the MAG:
>
> Civil society (drawing from people in organised civil society)
> Academic community
> Technical community
> Business
>
> This would deepen multi-stakeholder participation in my view.
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
> On 03/02/12 14:42, Marilia Maciel wrote:
> > Congratulations to the tentative list of nominees. Thanks to NomCom for
> > performing this important task and thanks in advance for the report they
> > are producing.
> >
> >
> >
> > As you know, one of the topics that are being discussed in the WG on IGF
> > improvements is precisely the process for nominating MAG members and the
> > role of MAG. MAG will have an even more fundamental role in a
> > strengthened IGF and the next group of selected MAG members will be
> > invited to find concrete mechanisms to give shape to some of the
> > suggestions for improvement that will come out of the WG. That is to say
> > that, in my view, the next group of MAG members will be appointed in a
> > crucial moment.
> >
> >
> >
> > It is very important that they are supported by the community and that
> > they are able to reverberate this support and legitimacy. The selection
> > process is important on this regard, as it puts in place an important
> > cornerstone. This is why this process needs to be documented and that
> > the parameters for selection need to be made clear.
> >
> >
> >
> > The WG has been discussing parameters for the selection of MAG and also
> > some of the responsibilities of MAG members. I reproduce below a
> > compilation (rough text) of points raised by the WG about the MAG, not
> > only as a contribution for the report of the NomCom (if some of these
> > topics could be covered in their report, it would be great, as we would
> > be walking the talk), but also for discussion. From this thread I am
> > sure that this topic is a concern of the community, and it would be
> > great to have feedback about what is being discussed in the WG about it.
> > The report will probably be structured with broad agreements as
> > "headlines", further detailed on more specific proposals.
> >
> > Marília
> >
> > *
> > *
> >
> > *B.II – MAG*
> >
> > *Broad agreement on the need to rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG
> > meetings transparent *
> >
> >
> >
> > *Broad agreement on the openness and transparency of MAG meetings*
> >
> > - The MAG should open its meeting to observers and make its proceedings
> > available in the form of a live text streaming. This verbatim record is
> > available on the IGF Web site. This proceeding is recommended for future
> > meetings in order to enhance the openness and transparency of its work.
> >
> > - Rotation of the MAG members, with one third rotated every year, should
> > be preserved, with a three-year limit to each member’s term in order to
> > provide opportunities to all interested participants and to ensure fair
> > representation
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *Broad agreement that the constitution of the MAG should be done in a
> > transparent and documented fashion *
> >
> > *Broad agreement on the transparency of the self-management by each
> > stakeholder group*
> >
> > - In light of transparency, stakeholder groups should publicise their
> > selection process and should identify the process that works best for
> > their own culture and methods of engagement
> >
> > - Selection of any stakeholder group may not be confined to be mediated
> > through any one particular body.
> >
> > - The selection would be based on proposed candidate lists made by the
> > three non-governmental stakeholder groups. The stakeholder groups are
> > encouraged to nominate a sufficiently large slate of candidates to
> > provide some flexibility in selection of MAG members and are asked to
> > ensure appropriate gender balance
> >
> > - One possibility mentioned by the MAG group itself last November:
> >
> > - A form of 'triage' that would be used to ensure appropriate
> > geographical balance among MAG members. This 'triage' could be carried
> > out by a trusted group of former non-governmental MAG members, perhaps
> > including some MAG members who are being rotated out. This trusted group
> > would work in active consultation with the respective stakeholder groups.
> >
> > The recommendation would then be submitted to the Secretary-General for
> > approval. One proposal was that the list of all MAG nominees to be
> > submitted to the Secretary-General should be published on the IGF
> website.
> >
> >
> >
> > - Another selection process was mentioned capturing the essence of the
> > NomCom idea, or we better call it "selection committee" to avoid
> > confusion with existing systems in other organizations.
> >
> > - The selection Committee members, appointed by the IGF Chair,
> > should be drawn fairly from representatives of stakeholders across the
> > different regions and constituencies.
> >
> > Preferably, the Selection Committee would include experts with
> > wide-ranging knowledge of Internet governance, previous experience of
> > program preparation and strong links to various stakeholder groups.
> >
> > This Selection Committee would select candidates for the MAG ensuring
> > balanced representation of geographical distribution, gender and the
> > wide range of stakeholders. The final selection of candidates should be
> > submitted to the UN Secretary-General for final approval.
> >
> > Open and transparent selection process and working process
> >
> >
> >
> > *Broad agreement that the MAG needs a clear Terms of Reference. *
> >
> >
> >
> > Requirements for MAG members:
> >
> > Potential stakeholder representatives should represent groups’ or
> > constituencies’ interest and not private interests.
> >
> > Selected members should present:
> >
> > - Proven ability to work as a team member
> >
> > - Active participation in the IGF process
> >
> > - Extensive linkages within one's own stakeholder group and, if
> > possible, to other stakeholder groups
> >
> > - Experience and expertise in Internet governance issues
> >
> >
> >
> > Responsibilities of MAG members:
> >
> > - Attend three meetings in Geneva per year; Participate in the yearly
> > global meeting;
> >
> > - Participate in inter-sessional work;
> >
> > - Make outreach to wider community, including national and regional IGF
> > type initiatives and bring other networks into the MAG;
> >
> > - Bring in comments from the community;
> >
> > - Explain recommendations to the community.
> >
> > - Willingness to commit to work and follow through
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Responsibilities of the MAG as a whole:
> >
> > - guidelines on actual tour of duty (length of service, rotations,
> > performance criteria such as removal/replacement of MAG members that do
> > not participate)
> >
> > - Develop the detailed programme including the identification of issues
> > of concern;
> >
> > - Selecting workshops and other meetings;
> >
> > - Defining how best to plan and organize the meetings;
> >
> > - Organizing main sessions and where necessary participate in dedicated
> > thematic working groups;
> >
> > - Establishing linkages between workshops and main sessions;
> >
> > - Facilitating the organization of workshops;
> >
> > - Coordinating panels and supporting panellists, moderators and speakers
> > at the annual meeting;
> >
> > - Liaising with their respective communities;
> >
> > -Publishing reports.
> >
> > - Additional outreach with other organizations and in conjunction with
> > secretariat
> >
> >
> >
> > Miscellaneous:
> >
> > - Giving idea of MAG selection process, keep it a dynamic committee.
> >
> > - Consider the role of the MAG in the context of an evolving IGF and in
> > the context of IGF improvements and the recommendations for IGF
> > improvements.
> >
> > - Consider relationships between the MAG and secretariat--roles and
> > responsibilities
> >
> > - Consider the role of the MAG in context of IGF no longer being just a
> > single event but rather having evolved into a process.
> >
> > - Consider mechanisms to enable the MAG to be more efficient.
> >
> > - Importance of open consultations and role of MAG as facilitator and
> > listener of what happens in consultations, important input into the
> process
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org
> > <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Parminder and all
> >
> > On 02/02/12 02:31, parminder wrote:
> > > Congrats to all the nominees. A very good list.
> >
> > Yes.. congrats to all.
> > >
> > > However, independent of the results produced which I welcome and
> > > support, I strongly agree with the sentiment of Avri's questions
> > below.
> >
> > Yes, so do I.
> >
> > > Representativity is the central issue of democracy, and its
> processes
> > > must be taken very very seriously, even if sometimes just forthe
> > > process's sake. I may be wrong, but I seem not to have seen the
> > kind of
> > > openness (proactive and not just formal), transparency, out-reach
> > effort
> > > etc that is required for the nomination/ election activity. Things
> > like:
> > > we need to make repeated calls for nomination, encourage people to
> > > nominate themselves and others, pulbicize the process and perhaps
> the
> > > list of nomcom members as well, make active out reach to various CS
> > > entities inviting nomination, keeping the list posted of all
> > > developments, ......
> > >
> > > For instance, APC I am sure will forward its own slate of names to
> the
> > > IGF secretariat. They should have been invited to submit their
> > nominees
> > > for IGC nomcom's consideration as well (and this has happened in
> the
> > > past).
> >
> > Parminder, we actually did submit our list of names to the IGC
> nomcom as
> > we think the IGC selection is an important one. We are not sure that
> > the IGC nomcom considered our list as did not receive any
> > acknowledgement.
> >
> > One person on our list is in the IGC list: Bill Drake, and we are
> happy
> > to see this. Bill has worked very hard with the MAG as a 'non-MAG'
> > member from the beginning, and has been a strong advocate for
> > development issues and CS interests, so I really hope he does make
> > the MAG.
> >
> > The other people on our list were (as Bill posted).
> >
> > Carlos Afonso (Brazil)
> > Magaly Pazello (Brazil)
> > Shahzad Ahmad (Pakistan)
> > Anriette Esterhuysen (South Africa)
> > David Souter (United Kingdom /IISD)
> >
> > We will send these directly to the secretariat as well.
> >
> > Anriette
> >
> >
> >
> > Enriching our catchment of potential candidates and thus the
> > > final list in this way greatly enhances IGC's legitimacy. And in
> the
> > > civil society space legitimacy building and losing is a very live
> and
> > > dynamic process. Every single act adds or takes away from it. At
> > times,
> > > like for the WG on IGF improvements, IGC has been considered the
> > single
> > > point of CS contact and representivity. We need to work hard to
> > live up
> > > to such a high responsibility, as mentioned by Avri. And I am
> > really not
> > > sure if we did in this case, though I am happy to be corrected.
> > >
> > > It is important to note that in the WG on IGF improvements we have
> > been
> > > seeking higher transparency, focussed and active out reach effort,
> > broad
> > > basing the pool of candidates etc for MAG selection, and we need to
> > > practise what we preach.
> > >
> > > Among many other things, I also could not understand the meaning
> > and use
> > > of having candidates submit their information in the 'required'
> format
> > > after the list of nominees is published. Isnt the required
> information
> > > supposed to be submitted precisely to aid the evaluation of
> nominees?
> > >
> > > There a few other points I will like to make, but a little later...
> > > parminder
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wednesday 01 February 2012 09:04 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> Good names all.
> > >>
> > >> But,
> > >>
> > >> What process was used?
> > >> Was there a public call for nominations? Did I miss seeing that?
> > >> Where are their statements? Did I miss seeing that? Are they
> > posted on the web site anywhere?
> > >> Is there a reason for each of these selections in terms of IGC
> > expectations? Did I miss seeing that? Are they posted somewhere?
> > >>
> > >> In the past we have gotten a Nomcom chair outlining everything in
> > detail. Did I miss that?
> > >>
> > >> The IGC's claim to represent Civil Society in Ig is tenuous at
> best
> > >> The lack of any information (or did I miss it?) on this selection
> > risks that even further.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> avri
> > >>
> > >> On 1 Feb 2012, at 08:06, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> Dear All,
> > >>>
> > >>> The Names that were submitted to the Coordinators by the NomCom
> > are as follows:
> > >>> • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda
> > >>> • Izumi AIZU (Mr) - Japan
> > >>> • Michael Gurstein (Mr) - Canada
> > >>> • Robert Guerra (Mr) - Canadian & European (Spain)
> > >>> • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva)
> > >>> • Fatima Cambronero (Ms) - Argentina
> > >>> • Fouad Bajwa (Mr) (current MAG member) - Pakistan
> > >>>
> > >>> However, these nominees were advised that failure to send their
> > information in via the required template would mean that their
> > names would not be sent.
> > >>>
> > >>> Kind Regards
> > >>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
> > <mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>>
> > <mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
> > <mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >>> Dear All,
> > >>>
> > >>> We thank the NOMCOM for selecting MAG candidates.
> > >>>
> > >>> In the interest of transparency, NOMCOM wrote to advise that
> > they had completed selection of the MAG. We have yet to receive the
> > information in the required format and an email was sent out to the
> > potential candidates to submit their information in the template
> > shown within the email. Potential candidates were advised that
> > failing to have the information submitted in required format could
> > mean that their names would not be put forward. They have been given
> > 12 hours to respond to enable this information to be sent.
> > >>>
> > >>> Submission of names were to be sent on the 31st January 2012.
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> > >>>
> > >>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> > >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > >>> Cell: +679 998 2851 <tel:%2B679%20998%202851>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> > >>>
> > >>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> > >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > >>> Cell: +679 998 2851 <tel:%2B679%20998%202851>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ____________________________________________________________
> > >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > >>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> > <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>>
> > >>> To be removed from the list, visit:
> > >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> > >>>
> > >>> For all other list information and functions, see:
> > >>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > >>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> > >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
> > >>>
> > >>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org <mailto:anriette at apc.org>
> > executive director, association for progressive communications
> > www.apc.org <http://www.apc.org>
> > po box 29755, melville 2109
> > south africa
> > tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 <tel:%2B27%2011%20726%201692>
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >
> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> > http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >
> > 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
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director, association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>
--
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/20120203/72895386/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list