[governance] MAG Selection [URGENT]
Anriette Esterhuysen
anriette at apc.org
Fri Feb 3 08:34:11 EST 2012
Thanks so much for checking the document carefully Marilia.. and going
back to the earlier version as well..
I checked the new version of the document and this text is still there,
on page 11. We will need to make sure that it is not just put at the
bottom of a long check list in the final report :)
Best
Anriette
On 03/02/12 15:23, Marilia Maciel wrote:
> 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
> <mailto: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>
> > <mailto: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>>>
> > <mailto: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>
> <tel:%2B679%20998%202851>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> > >>>
> > >>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> > >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > >>> Cell: +679 998 2851 <tel:%2B679%20998%202851>
> <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>>
> > <mailto: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> <mailto:anriette at apc.org
> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>>
> > executive director, association for progressive communications
> > www.apc.org <http://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>
> <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>
> <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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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 <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>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
-------------- 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