Sorry, the communication@wsisasia.org list settings seem to have
changed. I have been trying to send a not so long announcement about
encouraging WSIS caucuses and working groups to suggest names for the
Working Group on Internet Governance, but the list rejects the
messages as too long.
So, trying in two parts. Please read carefully and try respond.
Thanks,
Adam
PART ONE
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 10:35:37 +0900
To: plenary@wsis-cs.org
From: Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp>
Cc: governance@lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Nominations: Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG)
To Members of WSIS Civil Society, Caucuses and Working Groups
The WSIS Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus hopes to assemble a
list of candidates for membership in the Working Group on Internet
Governance (WGIG). The purpose of the list is to give Mr. Kummer and
Mr. Annan a set of candidates from which they can select members for
the WGIG. This list will not be the only input into the membership
decision process, and does not prevent any group or individual from
submitting her or his recommendations. We wish to provide the
collective recommendations of WSIS caucuses and working groups.
After much deliberation on the process by which the candidate list
would be compiled, we, as coordinators of the Internet Governance
caucus have made the decision to invite each of the WSIS civil
society caucuses and working groups to suggest between one (1) and
three (3) names for inclusion on the candidate list.
There is not agreement for this course of action among members of the
IG Caucus, but time is pressing and we feel WSIS Civil Society must
have an opportunity to participate in this process. This can work if
we all try to make it work. It means trying to think what is best
for civil society, and not any particular interest group. Please
read this note carefully. And refer to the draft statement on
structure of the WGIG you can find at this URL
<http://www.too-much.tv/internet_governance/> (Spanish, French,
English and Portuguese.)
One of the goals for this candidate list is to make sure that all of
the topical areas that might be included in the governance debate are
covered. Indications are that the WGIG will take a broad view of
Internet governance, and issues will include ICANN, Spam, information
and network security, privacy and other ICT rights issues,
intellectual property rights, and interconnection agreements to name
just a few. Asking the other caucuses and working groups for
recommendations is considered the best way to make sure that all
topics of concern to WSIS civil society are present.
Note that our recommendations about the structure of the WGIG (here
<http://www.too-much.tv/internet_governance/>) say we think the group
should be small, between 19 and 31 total core members. By asking for
nominations from all of WSIS civil society we are inviting a
potentially large number of names to be submitted. Some means of
reducing the composite list we receive may be required. We look
forward to your advice on how we might handle this situation, it is
quite likely. We suggest discussions about this are started now on
the CS plenary list.
Please attempt to prioritize your nominations. If you are unable to
do so please state clearly that your list is not prioritized.
Coordination of nominations among caucuses/working group will be very
helpful.
Individual members of the CS plenary may also submit nominations.
Individuals should submit their nominations based on the criteria
explained below.
As background for making the caucus/working group decision on the
candidates, a draft of the WSIS Civil Society caucus's contribution
on the WGIG can be found online at
<http://www.too-much.tv/internet_governance/>. These notes discuss
some of the contents of the contribution.
We consider it critical that a balanced WGIG be drawn from a multi
dimensional consideration of diversity. That is, diversity in terms
of sector, region, gender, and language background, among others,
must be considered in assembling the WGIG. It is also important that
there be a balance between members from developing and developed
countries. It is also considered very important that candidates have
a degree of knowledge of the issues, including policy, legal and
technical, involved in the Internet governance debate. We also
suggest candidates should have experience working in an international
committee environment, be aware of ICT for development issues and
human rights. No candidate is expected to have all these qualities,
but we are suggesting they should be people with broad experience.
It is considered critical that though all participants come from
different perspectives, they should be people who are willing to
listen and consider carefully the views of others. It is expected
that the best outcome for the WGIG will come from an assembly of open
minded individuals who can share their knowledge and expertise in an
cooperative manner.
Finally it is considered important that any individual nominated as a
candidate understand the amount of work this assignment would involve
and indicate a readiness to participate. While the work plan of the
WGIG has yet to be determined, it is expected that the WGIG will
begin work in the final months of 2004 and finish by July 2005. The
schedule will most probably involve, email discussions,
teleconferences and up to four (4) face to face meetings. We
anticipate that the working language of the WGIG itself will be
English. It is expected, however, that there will be a great
sensitivity to language issues as the WGIG conducts its work and
consultations.
END PART ONE
PART TWO explains information to include about any nomination.