Dear Deirdre and all I understand your ask about the list of candidates competing. I`d think this is an answer CSCG only can give you. What I can update you on, which was the goal of my message, is that CS MAG is involved in a selection process for a representative. And yes, this selected candidate can not participate on CSCG selections, because he/she would have been selected already. However, as you so thoughtully re-sent the rules done by UNDESA, other MAG members non-elected can participate. Not sure if I would describe that as "another chance" but more like adding to their list another challenge. Best, Renata On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Deirdre Williams <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear Renata, > > The instructions on the IGF website are rather complex but quite clear. > The representation will be 5 for each "stakeholder group" of which Civil > Society (CS) is one. > For CS > The CS MAG members will select 1 from among their group of 14, acknowledging > that some of the 14 may not be free to attend. That is a matter for the CS > MAG to arrange. > CSCG will select 2 representatives from civil society generally. (If it were > up to me, which it isn't, I would not consider the CS MAG in this process > since their opportunity came in the CS MAG selection) > CSCG will also present 3-4 additional nominations for the two additional CS > slots. These nominations may or may not be used in the final selection. > Since the objective of the meeting is a long term view of the 10 year > renewed mandate of the IGF and the 15 year period of the Sustainable > Development Goals the existing MAG with its maximum 3 year tenure is of > important but limited relevance. This is the reason for my comment on the > CSCG selection. > > That was in response to your message. > > My point, which was not answered, is that civil society has a right to know > who is in competition to represent it. This is in respect of the CSCG > selection which I see as being separate from the MAG selection. > > On Monday we will be having a General Election in Saint Lucia. Admittedly we > will all get to choose (vote). However the final result will be the group of > people who will provide governance here for the next 5 years. My argument is > that we have a right to know who all of them are, just as we have a right to > know who is competing to represent us at the Retreat in New York. > > Best wishes > Deirdre > > It is expected there will be 5 participants from each of the 4 IGF > Stakeholder communities. ... > To ensure continuity and integration with current IGF and MAG efforts, > current MAG members from each of the Civil Society, Technical, and Private > Sector communities will appoint 1 participant each. Additionally, each > community will have the option of designating 2 participants through their > own processes. The stakeholder communities are also requested to submit 3 - > 4 additional nominations for the remaining 2 positions while noting that > participants may also be drawn from self-nominations as well as nominations > from other institutions/organizations. This is to assure balanced > participation and broad diversity across a number of considerations. > http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf-retreat > > On 4 June 2016 at 14:49, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> Dear Deirdre and all >> >> The deadline for CSCG selection of nominees to IGF Retreat is upcoming. >> This process, however, depended on other aspects: >> 1) The candidates would have to send an email to CSCG nomcom >> 2) The candidates were also requested to self-nominate or be nominated >> in IGF website >> 3) The CSCG asked CS MAG members to present the result of their >> selection, so as not to indicate the same CS rep the CS MAG members >> choose >> >> I was honored to have been one of the CSCG nominees who became part of >> the MAG IGF 2016 >> I can not speak for the whole CS at MAG of course >> But I can say that the majority of MAG CS is participating on a >> selection process. >> Given the solution of that aspect, I am sure CSCG will follow the best >> path it can in terms of appointing nominees which do fulfill all the >> other conditions. >> >> Best, >> >> Renata >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Deirdre Williams >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> > Dear Friends, >> > Please excuse the deliberate cross-posting. >> > >> > The Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) is just finishing a >> > selection, >> > working to very tight deadlines, of representatives of civil society as >> > a >> > whole to attend a Retreat to be held in New York next month on the >> > future of >> > the Internet Governance Forum. >> > >> > When the Retreat was first proposed there was considerable debate about >> > the >> > involvement of civil society, and about whether CSCG should make the >> > selection. Finally it was agreed that CSCG should go ahead. After that >> > there >> > was silence. >> > >> > Currently there is no public knowledge of whether anyone at all in fact >> > presented themselves to CSCG for selection, nor, if anyone did, do we >> > have >> > any idea of who they might be. >> > >> > But those about to be represented, civil society as a whole, have a >> > right to >> > know the answers to these questions, and to know them BEFORE any >> > selection >> > is completed. >> > >> > This is a reminder to all of us, particularly in the context of the >> > review >> > of the CSCG, of the need to remember to "think communally" if we really >> > want >> > to change a hierarchical system, to be constantly aware of the >> > obligation of >> > information as a right, not as a favour, to all participants. >> > >> > Lack of engagement is a ubiquitous problem of governance. The >> > "stakeholders" >> > abdicate from participation in part at least because the "more equal" >> > stakeholders turn to each other rather than to them. In this there could >> > be >> > one answer to Item 2 of the call for comment on the Retreat draft agenda >> > which reads: >> > >> > 2) What measures can be taken to engage those stakeholders who are >> > currently unengaged, with a view to expand and diversify physical and >> > virtual participation? >> > >> > >> > Best wishes >> > >> > Deirdre >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir >> > William >> > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> > [log in to unmask] >> > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979