[governance] MAG Renewal

[Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro]

On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

> Hi Sala,
>
> the idea to coordinate civil society applications for the MAG has been
> discussed in previous years. The problem is that civil society around the
> world is much less organized than businesses. I don't see on what basis we
> could deny someone the right to put her name forward to the IGF
> secretariat. Neither bestbits nor the IG causus has any authority to
> monopolize the application process.
> Support by IGC/bestbits processes is likely to increase chances to be
> selected. Isn't that good enough under given circumstances?
> jeanette
>
> [Sala: I am glad that it was at least discussed in previous years which
means that there was an opportunity for people to think of the
implications. It is also possible that 2013 -2014 presents a unique set of
circumstances within the global landscape that accelerates the demand for
greater cohesion and coordination. The issue of MS Selection process
pertaining to civil society representatives is not specific to MAG
selection but for selection of agreed "spaces" and "contexts" within the
Internet Governance world. You are absolutely right, as there is nothing
stopping anyone from applying directly as it is their right to. For me the
rationale is not so much about securing spaces for voices from our
"specific stakeholder group" but a shift towards some sort of framework
that addresses the following:-

*Expectations*
1)Expectations by Civil Society of its representatives - Issues such as
Reporting, Early Warning Notifications, Highlighting considerable fluxes in
the discussions,

*Inclusion*
2)Allows for meaningful engagement and a sense of inclusion in the
processes; From time to time seeking general views of the wider community;
The development of the framework to have legitimacy can be put forward to
all civil society groups and individuals participating in national and
regional IGFs. Care can be take to solicit views from the ground as to how
they feel about such a framework.

*Principles*
3) The cross civil society groups should identify a set of principles the
nature of its working together. This helps to moderate the climate for
meaningful engagement. It could include things like collaboration, etc.

*Vehicle for Facilitation*
4)Identify the vehicle to facilitate the setting up of NomCom where they do
not necessarily have to be from one organisation but the selection of the
NomCom must be done in an open and transparent manner allowing for others
to apply. This can mean that the framework would set out the nature of the
NomCom, could be regional diversity aside from just random drawing of
numbers but it should be the result of cross- civil society dialogue that
allows people to discuss the manner in which the selection should be made;

We have a few options but two that stand out at the moment are:

   - Restrict the Framework to MS Selection Processes only
   - Have a General Framework for Engagement that includes MS Selection
   processes as well as Joint Advocacy on agreed Issues

Kind Regards,

Sala
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20131109/9e891cb7/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