[IGFmaglist] Potential IGF 2017 Intersessional activities
kemochiz at yahoo-corp.jp
Mon Mar 27 04:27:56 EDT 2017
Dear Elizabeth, Mamadou, Renata, and all,
Thank you so much for your e-mails and I would also like to echo what Elizabeth said in the previous e-mail.
As a new MAG member, I have been reading some relevant webpages, documents, and other resources to catch up the recent development and background of your discussions. To be honest, I feel it will take more time to grasp the whole picture of MAG activities but today, I would like to cast the following questions based on my previous experiences to serve as an advisor for WTO Dispute Settlement in Permanent Mission of Japan in Geneva.
Thank you again and please, accept my apologies for being unable to join the previous MAG meeting as well as regular virtual meetings occasionally due to the time difference.
1. IGF Registry
You have been uploading documents including a summary report of a meeting on your website, but why doesn’t each document have a document number and why isn’t there a online registry where members (or any other stakeholders) can search all relevant documents like https://documents.un.org/prod/ods.nsf/xpSearchResultsE.xsp ? I do know it is quite difficult to “newly” create such registry due to our financial constraint, but I think it is quite important to keep the record of all of our activities in such a way as being able to search easily.
2. Rules of Procedure
As Elizabeth mentioned, we need to have rules of procedure or decision-making rules on BPFs, DCs, and any other intersessional activities although we adopt a rough consensus system at successive meetings. We should be mindful that our resources are quite limited and what our mandate is. I personally would not like to impose so much burden on the IGF Secretariat as well as all MAG members although we are inclined to do a lot of things for proper Internet governance.
BTW, while I fully support your initiative to draw up this participant’s guide (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1u7xvRKhuSgoDhjFf4-iASknM3Ve-hVwgXH_ZJhR8dkE/edit ), I think we had better make it more detailed so that all participants can understand the whole processes.
3. Mandate of the MAG
I have been looking for a legal basis or official evidencing document to establish the MAG in order to check our mandate. I found this press release (https://www.un.org/press/en/2006/sga1006.doc.htm) but there is no citation. I would appreciate if you could let me know if there are any UN official documents on our mandate, in addition to MAG’s Terms of Reference (http://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/mag-terms-of-reference).
Why I would like to find this is because it is indispensable for us to come back to our mandate when thinking about what we can do in the context of intersessional activities like BPFs, DCs and MAG Working Groups.
While the IGF mandate is provided in Tunis agenda (which is cited in WSIS+10 Outcome Document), our activities (MAG mandate) should be within the mandate of the IGF and more importantly, we should explicitly mention the clear linkage between the mandates (IGF as well as MAG) and each of our intersessional work (although this is just a formality).
Kenta Mochizuki (Mr.)
Attorney at Law (New York)
Public Policy & Corporate Governance
Corporate Management Group
Yahoo Japan Corporation
TEL: 03-6898-4205 / 080-4797-5462
E-MAIL: kemochiz at yahoo-corp.jp<mailto:kemochiz at yahoo-corp.jp>
From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Renata Aquino Ribeiro
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2017 3:53 AM
To: Mamadou LO <alfamamadou at hotmail.com>
Cc: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] Potential IGF 2017 Intersessional activities
Dear Mamadou, Elizabeth and all
Your questions on next steps for intersessional activities to Secretariat are quite interesting. I will join you in hoping we discuss this at our next meeting.
About the BPF on Remote Participation - BPF RP, I am just now reading the comments in reply. Thank you so much for them and for your support. It will be great to discuss this theme in 2017 with you all participating.
As for the Working group on Outreach and Communication - WGCO, it has been doing a great work and certainly actions on this direction on 2017 are much needed. I see this group very differently than the BPF as it relates directly to publicizing the IGF main event and its intersessionals and helping gather participants to collaborate on IGF in the physical meeting or in the webconferences or documents.
It is a great idea, Mamadou, a review of the intersessional activities to go out monthly. It was always needed an integration between WGCO and the other intersessional activities and this can be a great way to move forward. It could gather information from something simple like a shared calendar, an action which I believe has already been discussed but not deeply. Thank you so much for giving your thoughts and willingness to help on this front, it is much appreciated.
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Mamadou LO <alfamamadou at hotmail.com<mailto:alfamamadou at hotmail.com>> wrote:
As new MAG member, I fully agree with Elizabeth to clear concept in DPFs, DCs, and in some ways, intersessional activities (as Avri requested) so as to go forward. Also, I do not understand a BPF on communication along with a working group on online participation as both items dealing with Global Communication.
By the way, I still think we do need to see how we can address the issue of support functions empowering MAG team within MAG and IGF. For example I see communication and informations support (weekly IG review) in those functions.
Otherwise, I would like to suggest a monthly weekly review for each BPFs. The review will consist on gathering mainly news each month relating to the issue. Like general weekly review we actually do on global IG, the BPF review will be sent in the igfmag mailing list in order to help ourselves be aware of what happening in each BPF environment. That will help to push forward on issue we have to talk about and to match community IG matters. If this proposal meet agreement of MAG, I can go further by beginning the job by end of May.
Chef du Département Communication et Information Documentaire
Head of Communication and Information Department
Crédit Agricole Sénégal
Tel : 221 77 645 59 57
De : Igfmaglist <igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org<mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org>> de la part de THOMAS-RAYNAUD Elizabeth <elizabeth.thomas-raynaud at iccwbo.org<mailto:elizabeth.thomas-raynaud at iccwbo.org>>
Envoyé : vendredi 24 mars 2017 16:43
À : cmasango at unog.ch<mailto:cmasango at unog.ch>; 'IGF Maglist'
Objet : Re: [IGFmaglist] Potential IGF 2017 Intersessional activities
In recent discussions with community members we found that we lacked clarity about the process through which the intersessional activities are respectively decided upon or resources designated to support the expansion of additional ones. I was asked whether it was a MAG or Secretariat decision and what considerations differed for BPFs vs DCs, so I must ask if you have that answer. We’ve spoken about limiting the number of concurrent BPFs recently among the MAG but I couldn’t answer the question whether there can be an unlimited number of DCs or whether there was any measurement/reporting activity on the intersessional activities that set any standard or requirement for them to continue. Your report on 2017 activities notes the items/proposals put forward but it doesn’t indicated what vetting process is required for them to go forward so is it correct to assume that anything not contested by MAG members is accepted?
I am requesting more clarity on these questions if you or someone else might write and share them ahead of the virtual meeting next week so we discuss these topics from a common understanding on these questions. I fear based on recent discussions with those who’ve served longer than me on the MAG as well as newly appointed, without this clarity we run the risk of misunderstanding our task on the call due to false assumptions.
There was a similar question posed about what determines whether a MAG Working Group goes ahead. Is it just for a member to propose and no one to contest or is there a critical mass that has to endorse it as a worthwhile pursuit? Is there an unlimited number? A process for distinguishing what makes sense for the MAG to consider working on and in what capacity it would be doing so. Having served on the WG on Outreach and Communication last year, I felt at times there was a confusion between what we as MAG could/should being doing and what was the role of the Secretariat.
Also, as expressed in the meeting in Geneva and reinforced since my discussions with many in the community since –we must keep top of mind that there are finite resources of Secretariat support, MAG time and community members to cover and contribute to work. We risk failing to be the IGF we want by never saying no so I hope we can work out how even good ideas that aren’t contested be weighed in view of relative value, importance and resource impact and I urge that we need more help in assessing that.
Many thanks in advance for assisting with these questions.
Happy weekend to all.
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
Project Director, ICC Business Action to Support the Information Society (BASIS)
Senior Policy Executive, Digital Economy
From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org<mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org>] On Behalf Of Chengetai Masango
Sent: 14 March 2017 19:54
To: 'IGF Maglist'
Subject: [IGFmaglist] Potential IGF 2017 Intersessional activities
Please find attached a table of the potential 2017 intesessional activities and their status according to the Secretariat’s recollection.
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Igfmaglist