[governance] [bestbits] Civil society transparency
Jeremy Malcolm
jmalcolm at eff.org
Thu May 28 21:41:20 EDT 2015
Replying just to the IGC list in respect of the suggestion that the IGC could host this McCarthy Committee on civil society funding and transparency, I doubt that there is any consensus that it should do this, and the IGC cannot act in its absence.
I for one cannot imagine a scenario in which this would not do much more harm than good. There had already been much negative fallout from JNC members interrogating others on this list and the Best Bits lists by about their funding and demanding they take particular accountability and transparency measures. We could not withstand another such inquisition without a foundation of mutual trust and respect, which frankly will take much time to rebuild, beginning with an adjustment in attitude from the inquisitioners.
--
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org
Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
> On May 28, 2015, at 4:39 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> Thanks Ian
>
> Responding to the two issues you raise.
>
>> On Monday 25 May 2015 12:27 PM, Ian Peter wrote:
>> Hi Parminder,
>>
>> Two issues in response to your suggestion.
>>
>> Firstly, the suggestion that CSCG do this. CSCG consists of five people who are pretty busy co-ordinating coalitions of CS organisations (BB, JNC, IGC, APC, NCSG) and myself as an independent chair. The role of CSCG is to ensure a co-ordinated civil society response and conduit when it comes to making civil society appointments to outside organisations. It has no staff, no funding, not even a formal charter. In order to address some of the issues it faces I have suggested from time to time that the membership be expanded to include say 3 more respected civil society people who are not formal representatives of coalitions of CS organisations. The last time I suggested this it was met with some strongly worded negative responses from JNC and I have not heard of any change of position on this. So for these reasons I don’t think CSCG is the right organisation to take on this task. Perhaps IGC?
>
> I suggested CSCG bec it has reps from major CS networks and so there was a common ownership over what should be a commonly owned and directed initiative so that there is scope of bias, and appropriate avenues of recourse exist. I still think CSCG the right body for it, but IGC would do as well. As for resources, let me make this blind offer, I will try and raise resources for one person devoting her half/ quarter time, who can be housed in a reputed org with a neutral image, for this purpose. More resources are needed initially for setting it up, but once set up it wont require much. I still do not know from where id seek resources but I am confident that with so much funds coming into the IG space someone somewhere would give a few thousand dollars for overall transparency and accountability in the sector. That should address and settle the resources argument in terms of my proposal.
>
>>
>> Secondly, I wonder how it would work in CS which has so many people who are basically acting as individuals rather than representatives of organisations. Many if not most of us also have non CS affiliations (eg membership of ISOC, business or governmental employees if we are cs volunteers, academic postings etc) so the “pure” CS rep is probably a bit hard to find. I am not sure what we would gain by having a register of all our multiple affiliations which would need regular updating to be of any use. I think we need to ensure our major coalitions (BB, JNC, IGC, APC, NCSG) act transparently, and by and large I think they do. But I am not sure of the value of extending this to what is probably tens of thousands of members or organisations affiliated with these larger groups.
>
> Almost all CS transparency and accountability initiatives are focussed on organisations and not individuals, bec of the obvious reasons that the former have a greater role and impact. One may not need such processes for individuals, other than perhaps when any nominations or appointments are being on behalf of civil society , in which case anyone would agree that some basic declarations should in any case be necessary, and such simple and basic decelerations alone are what my proposed initiative asks for.
>
>>
>> Over to others to discuss. I am not opposed to the suggestion that something be done in this area, but I think we need to refine any such idea somewhat,
>
> Please give suggestions.
>
>> and if the aim is somehow to enhance CS credibility and transparency in this space, perhaps we should also discuss what other measures might also assist this.
>
> And for this as well.
>
> Thanks again. parminder
>>
>> Ian Peter
>>
>> From: parminder
>> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2015 3:31 PM
>> To: Ian Peter ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; BestBitsList ; mailto:forum at justnetcoalition.org ; A general information sharing space for the APC Community.
>> Subject: [governance] Civil society transparency
>>
>> Ian, and reps of civil society networks on the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) ,
>>
>> I propose that CSCG sets up a civil society transparency project, somewhat on the lines of the EU Transparency Register, pl see http://ec.europa.eu/transparencyregister/public/homePage.do .
>>
>> It should in fact go beyond the EU initiative which is a general one for all lobbying groups, whereas we here are concerned with civil society which should set the highest example of transparency and accountability. The 'register' can have self filled information on objectives of an organisation, principles followed by it, if any, its funding, partners, and so on....
>>
>> This is at present just my proposal, but I hope one or more civil society networks in the IG space can own it and push it... CSCG would be well placed to run this project as a neutral space so that there is no accusation of bias that any such initiative is being employed for partisan purposes. In any case, a simple initiative for openness, transparency and accountability can hardly be partisan.
>>
>> The register can have optional higher level features whereby a group/ org can declare its means of public accountability, whether and how its internal governance is done, how matters can be taken by with their oversight bodies, like board etc, and whether they have any means whereby they respond to public question on their work, etc.
>>
>> For such genuine cases where such transparency can harm an organisations work, or security, such organisations, and only such organisations, can be exempted employing a clear process and set of criteria.
>>
>> Remember, both the UN report on improvements to the IGF and the NetMundial Statement highlight the issue of transparency. I also recently read in these lists how we should make bridges with the OpenGov movement which is almost wholly about this one thing. Time we begin practising what we preach.
>>
>> I look forward to hear responses to this proposal..
>>
>> parminder
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150528/9ac560cc/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