[governance] Retreat on Advancing the 10-Year Mandate of the Internet Governance Forum

Thu May 26 03:54:57 EDT 2016

Hello all, hello Sandra,

Your comments are of great relevance. The processes are often complex and
full challenges. In the case of the DRC, we tried several cases since 2007:

1. In 2007, civil society was able to organize activities of IGF which
universities, government, civil society participated except  private
sector. No explanation was given why private sector has not answered this
invitation;

2.Since 2008 we tried with UNDP has asked the approval of Ministry in
charge of ICT. The repetitive change within government allowed us to go
through our process. In meantime, we have also requested ISOC DRC.
Unfortunately,
the leaders of ISOC DRC let us hear the national IGF does not fit in their
concern. This has availed until 2014;

3.In 2013, despite all  difficulties, we were able to organize 3rd edition
of  IGF Central Africa;

4.In 2014, with  Declaration of African Ministers in charge of ICTs in
Khartoum in 2012, we resumed efforts to implement the National IGF and also
join the private sector concerns;

5.In 2015,we were fortunate to have savvy and knowledgeable speakers on
WSIS and who understand the need to implement the national IGF. With good
listening and attention of the Minister in Charge of ICT, we now have an
autonomous and independent national IGF which now has cosentement of all
stakeholders: government, private sector, universities, technical community
resource centers and research libraries, some international organizations
such as the representation of the Agence Universitaire de la Francophonie
in Kinshasa.

So the renewal of the IGF mandate of 10 years responds to some concerns
about the implementation of the 2030 agenda of sustainable development
correlates with the expected Results by identifying players with respect to
each of this agenda .

So,I agree with you because the structural organization of the IGF at
national and regional level depends on the circumstances of each country,
in each region.

2016-05-24 20:32 GMT+01:00 sandra hoferichter <sandra.hoferichter at freenet.de
>:

> I found this announcement today:
>
> [cut/paste from http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf-retreat ]
>
> “…*a two-day working retreat is proposed by UN Secretariat as part of the
> process of continual improvement of the IGF. A strategic dialogue will be
> held among experts, policymakers and practitioners in enriching IGF as the
> global forum for facilitating multistakeholder policy discussion and
> exchange on public policy issues related to key elements of Internet
> governance, in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security,
> stability and development of the Internet (in line with its mandate as
> established by the Tunis Agenda para 72).  As part of the discussion, we
> will welcome inputs on how the IGF discussions can contribute to the
> implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development[2].*
>
> *Expected outcomes of the retreat include (but are not limited to): (i)
> ways to improve the overall preparatory process of the IGF, the structure
> and nomination process for the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG), and
> ways to strengthen the IGF Secretariat; (ii) measures to engage those
> stakeholders who are currently unengaged, with a view to expand and
> diversify physical and virtual participation; (iii) finding ways to better
> capture the outputs of the IGF and increasing their visibility and impact;
> (iv) ideas to support the work of national and regional IGF initiatives,
> and leverage the synergies between them as well as synergies with the IGF;
> and (v) modalities to ensure sustained funding to support the IGF and the
> IGF Secretariat….”*
>
>
>
> I am convinced it is the right moment to think about a long term strategy
> and development of the IGF, now that there is planning security for 10
> years and very much welcome this initiative. I just wonder why the call is
> limited to *“…5 participants from each of the 4 IGF Stakeholder
> communities.” * Are national / regional coordinators not expected to
> participate, although we can expect a great source of expertise here?
>
>
>
> SPEAKING FOR MYSELF: As the coordinator of the EuroDIG I would not assign
> myself to any of these groups for the simple reason of neutrality towards
> all these groups, when offering a platform for discussion and balancing all
> interests equally. So although I would like to contribute to this important
> process I would have no chance to get nominated. Am I the only one in this
> situation?
>
>
>
> SPEAKING IN GENERAL: I know that the composition of coordinating teams is
> different in each county / region. Often there is indeed a committee
> composed of representatives drawn from these 4 stakeholder groups, but
> often these groups are not so balanced for various reasons (for instance
> because one stakeholder group is in the lead and has the ability, while
> others in the region don’t). I believe being in the role of a coordinator
> desires a certain degree of neutrality towards all stakeholder groups,
> which puts IG(F) coordinators naturally in a special position, even if they
> belong to one of the 4 groups. This would IMO desire an additional category
> for such a call.
>
>
>
> I would be interested in other views.
>
>
>
> Best Sandra
>
>
>
> Point of order: Although I am very much interested in this process, I
> would hardly be in the position to attend in NY, because the EuroSSIG is
> starting on 16 July. So I am not posting this to get a seat in this
> retreat.
>
> _______________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> [image: Logo_EuroDIG_email]
>
>
>
> *S a n d r a   H o f e r i c h t e r *
>
> Secretary General
>
>
>
> *European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG)*
>
>
>
> sandra at eurodig.org <office at eurodig.org>
> www.eurodig.org
>
>
>
> Fon: +49.341.301 28 27
>
> Mobile: +49.163.380 87 85
>
>
>
>
> This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
> are not the intendet recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
> please notify the sender  immediately and destroy this mail. Any
> unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of material in this e-mail
> is strictly forbidden.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>

-- 

*SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN*
*SECRETAIRE EXECUTIF FGI RDC*
*EXECUTIVE SECRETARY/ FGI DRC*

*COORDINATEUR NATIONAL CAFEC*

*ICANN/AFRALO Member*
*ISOC Member*
Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512
email                  : b.schombe at gmail.com
skype                 : b.schombe
blog                    : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20160526/50c9ce1b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6587 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20160526/50c9ce1b/attachment.jpg>
-------------- 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