[IRPCoalition] Reasons of thinking that the selection process of nominees for representing the civil society at GMMIG of Sao Paulo is ongoing

Antoine Kantiza antoinekantiza at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 17 15:05:53 EET 2014

Dear all,

I  begin by congratulating the first round
of talented selected persons for representing the Civil society for preparing
the upcoming Global Multistakeholder  Meeting of Internet Governance
in the Meeting of Sao Paulo in Brazil.

However I quote five reasons of thinking that the
selection of nominees for representing Civil society at GMMIG is ongoing:

1°) Only one candidate has been elected in each
Committee: Jovan Kurbalija for the High Level Committee and Marilia Maciel
for the Executive Multistakeholder Committee as it is displayed by Virginia
(Ginger) Paque on the website: http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/profiles/blogs/diplo-community-submission-to-cs-coordination-group-brazil-ms-mee‏ where the whole list of applicants was highlighted  since
Tuesday, on January 7th, 2014  -sixteen applicants for HLC
and twelve applicants for EMC-  meaning that others selected persons
are the outsiders elected for theirs proved know-how in Internet Governance 

2°) It has been asserted in the Call for Nomination
that four persons will be nominated for the High Level Committee and two
persons for the Executive Multistakeholder Committee, so the HLC should be
completed by at least by one person.

3°) The developing countries are under-represented
among the selection of CS Coordination Group who don’t live the true reality
of Internet Governance in enclosed developing countries where the democratization
of Internet access is not only denied by the high cost of Internet- one dollar by half past an hour of Internet connection
where the average income of inhabitants is less than two dollars by day- but
also by many other matters such as the highest digital illiteracy as well as the
little level of integrity and the lack of professionalism among Internet
stakeholders, the deficit of basic ICT infrastructures in rural area  or
the monopoly position of closed club of Internet providers what I suggest to be
analyzed in 2014 IGF in order to struggle against digital divide inside
developing countries, also it has been promised that amid the criteria of
selection of candidates “includes perspectives/representation of groups
typically under-represented in global IG processes”

4°) The selection of CS Coordination Group should have been revealed first of all by Virginia (Ginger) Paque who disclosed the list of the nominees of
civil society onhttp://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/profiles/blogs/diplo-community-submission-to-cs-coordination-group-brazil-ms-me and who asserted that she “will post the
names of the chosen civil society representatives as soon as it is finalised
and sent to 1Net and the LOG (Local Organizing Group)” when the current
selections of the CS Coordination Group has been revealed in scoop by a non voting chair
who recognized that “some aspects of these selections will be controversial”

5°) The selection process for the applicants who will
advocate for transparency in Internet Governance process should prove that the
selection of candidates has been done in transparency by proclaiming the
selected persons classified by scores given by CS Coordination Group in
accordance to the prior criteria of selection announced in the call for

Prof Antoine KANTIZA, Master UTICEF,-
Webmaster à la Radio-Télévision Nationale du Burundi
http://www.burundi-quotidien.net  &  http://www.rtnb.bi/
Editor of @RTNBurundi's content

Skype ID: antoine.kantiza
Twitter ID: @antoinekantiza     
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/irp/attachments/20140117/b7395de9/attachment.html>

More information about the IRP mailing list