[governance] [igf_members] MAG Renewal

[Adam Peake]

Must the IGF adopt all the recommendations of the WG on IGF
Improvements?  Not clear on their status.

Has there been adequate (open, transparent, inclusive) discussion of
the WG's recommendations?

Adam




On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:16 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 14 May 2013 08:42 PM, michael gurstein wrote:
>
> My congratulations to those chosen from all stakeholder groups to the MAG.
>
> One observation however, based on a summary review of the list provided by
> Bill--of the five individuals selected to the MAG to represent CS, all are
> women and 4 of the 5 are from Latin America or the Caribbean.
>
> I'm assuming that the UN in its wisdom (appropriately) applied criteria to
> ensure gender and regional balance; however, rather than applying these
> criteria within each stakeholder group they appeared to apply these to the
> MAG as a whole; which given significant longstanding gender and regional
> biases in other of the stakeholder groups, evidently resulted in the rather
> odd absence of representivity within CS including an absence of
> representation from Africa, Europe and North America among other anomalies.
>
> This is what the WG on IGF Improvements sought, and I quote from its
> report.....
>
> (a) The three non-governmental stakeholder groups should propose lists of
> candidates that should be balanced, including in terms of gender
> distribution and in reflecting the diversity of geographical distribution.
> This will enable a wide range of diversity within the MAG, especially those
> groups which have been underrepresented in the MAG, and be sufficiently
> large to provide some flexibility when selecting MAG members.
>
> (b) Stakeholder groups should identify and publicize the process that works
> best for their own culture and methods of engagement and which will ensure
> their self-management.
>
> (c) The contribution of lists of proposed candidates for each stakeholder
> group should not be restricted to one particular body.
>
> ....................
>
> (a) The process of selection of MAG members should be inclusive,
> predictable, transparent and fully documented.
>
>
> (ends)
>
> The required transparency and documentation condition have not been
> fulfilled till now.... IGC must urgently write to UNDESA and IGF secretariat
> to do the needful, at the earliest. If CS isnt the one demanding fulfilment
> of transparency requirements I dont know who will...
>
> parminder
>
>
> M
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>

-------------- 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