[Governance] NOTICE: CSCG nomination process for IGF Leadership Panel
Deirdre Williams
williams.deirdre at gmail.com
Sun Nov 28 08:12:56 EST 2021
It seems to me that Suresh and Parminder have hit the nail on the head
together.
The semantics and semiotics of the English language (and I expect of others
as well) have been rudely interfered with in this new digital world.
Computer programs reject shades of meaning. But those shades still exist
inside people's understanding.
To call something a "Leadership" panel in a world where hierarchies are
supposed to have been broken down, where the process purports to be flat
and inclusive, is surely a mistake?
Stay safe
Deirdre
On Sun, 28 Nov 2021 at 07:31, Suresh Ramasubramanian via Governance <
governance at lists.igcaucus.org> wrote:
> People who sit on committees appointed by the Indian government calling
> others “leadership class”?
>
> Global south buzzwords fit some people Parminder but you least of all
>
>
> --srs
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Governance <governance-bounces at lists.igcaucus.org> on behalf of
> parminder via Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> *Sent:* Sunday, November 28, 2021 3:26:40 PM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Governance] NOTICE: CSCG nomination process for IGF
> Leadership Panel
>
>
> Dear Nnenna and Jovan, and indeed, Wolfgang,
>
> I know things may look different to leadership class people like you :)
>
> But the view from the streets is quite a bit different.
>
> My best wishes in any case, parmidner
>
>
> On 26/11/21 7:22 pm, Nnenna Nwakanma via Governance wrote:
>
> Thanks, Jovan, for this apt articulation.
>
> You represent my thoughts
>
> Best
>
> Nnenna
>
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2021, 13:36 Jovan Kurbalija via Governance, <
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org> wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> This discussion is important not only for IGF Leadership Panel, but for
> the future of the IGF as a whole. Civil society and other non-state
> actors should be particularly concerned about the future of IGF as it is a
> rare space in which we can all participate equally.
> For almost ten years, reform of the IGF has been in the works in various
> iterations. It is not new.
>
> The Leadership Panel should be seen as part of a broader attempts to
> reform IGF.
>
>
> I think that the Leadership Panel is a timely and relevant steps in the
> right direction of strengthening the IGF.
>
> However, these steps should be taken with necessary caution as outlined in
> the following text:
> https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/
>
>
>
> - 5 REASONS for the IGF Leadership Panel
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#5_REASONS_for_the_IGF_Leadership_Panel>
> - 1. Policy footprint: increasing the relevance of IGF as a space
> to address digital policy
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#1_Policy_footprint_increasing_the_relevance_of_IGF_as_a_space_to_address_digital_policy>
> - 2. Louder voices: amplify IGF messages and expertise
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#2_Louder_voices_amplify_IGF_messages_and_expertise>
> - 3. Policy conveyor belt: linking the IGF to other policy spaces
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#3_Policy_conveyor_belt_linking_the_IGF_to_other_policy_spaces>
> - 4. Genuine inclusion: from nominal to substantive participation
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#4_Genuine_inclusion_from_nominal_to_substantive_participation>
> - 5. Policy efficiency: reducing forum shopping
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#5_Policy_efficiency_reducing_forum_shopping>
> -
> - 5 CONCERNS for the IGF Leadership Panel
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#5_CONCERNS_for_the_IGF_Leadership_Panel>
> - 1. The Leadership Panel is only one aspect of IGF Plus
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#1_The_Leadership_Panel_is_only_one_aspect_of_IGF_Plus>
> - 2. IGF and Digital Compact
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#2_IGF_and_Digital_Compact>
> - 3. Preserving IGF as a space for vibrant discussions
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#3_Preserving_IGF_as_a_space_for_vibrant_discussions>
> - 4. Avoid capturing by vested interest
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#4_Avoid_capturing_by_vested_interest>
> - 5. Solve terminological confusion
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#5_Solve_terminological_confusion>
> -
> - In sum….
> <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/5-reasons-and-5-concerns-for-the-igf-leadership-panel/#In_sum%E2%80%A6>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jovan
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 10:52 AM Sheetal Kumar via Governance <
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> We did not receive a requisite number of eligible nominations for this
> process launched last week. We are therefore unable to proceed with the
> nomination process for the Leadership Panel as CSCG.
>
> While this does not constitute a boycott, we understand that the level of
> doubt and concerns around the Leadership Panel may indicate that there
> isn't the support required.
>
> We will continue to follow the process and to demand the transparency and
> diversity required in all areas of the IGF, and to work towards
> strengthening it in the coming years with the view to realising the true
> spirit of the IGF's multistakeholder mission. More on our previous/relevant
> position here:
> https://www.apc.org/en/pubs/open-letter-interpretation-paragraph-93a-un-secretary-generals-roadmap-digital-cooperation.
> There we say "Multistakeholderism, diversity and inclusion should guide any
> new structure, building on the IGF legacy thus far and be the basis for
> putting the structure in function of shaping the global internet governance
> agenda in a way that effectively addresses the persistent, exacerbated and
> new challenges derived from the pandemic situation, including the
> increasing power of some parts of the industry, in particular the large
> technology companies, and the lack of voices from more vulnerable and
> marginalised groups."
>
> We do not want this to be seen as discouragement to anyone planning to
> nominate themselves. However, as a network, it is clear that we don't have
> the support or interest to continue with this specific nomination process.
>
> Best
> Sheetal and Bruna
>
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 at 16:25, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org>
> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> This is a polite reminder to share your nominations to the CSCG for the
> IGF's leadership panel, as per the process outlined below. We request this
> is done by *COB November 22 *so that we are able to submit by the
> deadline of
> *November 29. *
>
>
> We look forward to receiving your nomination/s.
> Best
> Sheetal
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 at 13:51, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org>
> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> As you may have seen, the IGF Secretariat has launched the nomination
> process at the request of the Executive Office of the United Nations
> Secretary-General for the *inaugural Leadership Panel of the 2022 and
> 2023 Internet Governance Forum (IGF) cycles*
> <https://www.intgovforum.org/en/content/internet-governance-forum-leadership-panel-call-for-nominations>.
>
>
>
>
> Following several rounds of open consultations, the Leadership Panel is a
> response to the Secretary-General’s Roadmap for Digital Cooperation
> <https://undocs.org/A/74/821>, which calls for strengthening of the IGF
> through, among other aspects, *’’creating a strategic and empowered
> multi-stakeholder high-level body, building on the experience of the
> existing multi-stakeholder advisory group, which would address urgent
> issues, coordinate follow-up action on Forum discussions and relay proposed
> policy approaches and recommendations from the Forum to the appropriate
> normative and decision-making forums*.’’
>
>
> CSCG, and for this process, this includes APC and IGC, will run a
> nomination process to identify nominees for the two categories:
>
> - Two [2] at-large members (distinguished or prominent persons who do
> not fall under above stakeholder groups) and
> - Two [2] CEO-level (or deputy-level) representatives from each of the
> other three stakeholder groups (civil society)
>
> Please note, this does not mean we endorse the process or the mechanism
> itself. We will send a letter with the nominations that clearly reiterates
> our previous publicly stated positions (such as this Open letter on the
> interpretation of paragraph 93(a) of the UNSG's Roadmap on Digital
> Cooperation
> <https://www.apc.org/en/pubs/open-letter-interpretation-paragraph-93a-un-secretary-generals-roadmap-digital-cooperation>
> and this on the future of the IGF
> <https://www.apc.org/en/pubs/why-inclusive-transparent-and-accessible-global-digital-governance-more-crucial-ever>on
> the Leadership Panel/Higher-level MAG
> <https://www.apc.org/en/pubs/why-inclusive-transparent-and-accessible-global-digital-governance-more-crucial-ever>),
> including the importance of maintaining the MAG's current role and not
> supplanting it, the importance of diversity and inclusion, transparency etc
> and make clear that our submission of nominees should not be read as
> endorsement.
>
>
> We intend that our nominations reflect the above criteria. Please note
> that to receive a CSCG nomination for the IGF leadership panel you'll need
> to send us (me and Valeria and Bruna cc'd) the information required on the online
> form
> <https://www.intgovforum.org/en/content/leadership-panel-nomination-2022>.
> We request this is done by *COB November 22 *so that we are able to
> submit by the deadline of
> *November 29. *
>
>
> We look forward to receiving your nomination/s.
> Best
> Sheetal
>
>
> --
>
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Head of Global Engagement and Advocacy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| Time zone: GMT | M: +44 (0)7739569514 |
> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Head of Global Engagement and Advocacy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| Time zone: GMT | M: +44 (0)7739569514 |
> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Head of Global Engagement and Advocacy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| Time zone: GMT | M: +44 (0)7739569514 |
> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>
>
>
> --
> Governance mailing list
> Governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> https://lists.igcaucus.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>
> --
> Governance mailing list
> Governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> https://lists.igcaucus.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>
>
> --
> Governance mailing list
> Governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> https://lists.igcaucus.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>
--
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20211128/a9fa4de6/attachment.htm>
More information about the Governance
mailing list