[WG-Strategy] Draft: Ideas how to operationalize the MHLB

[Poncelet Ileleji Jokko Banjul]

Same applies to me @Raul thanks for the break down.

Kind Regards

Poncelet

*Poncelet O. Ileleji*
*Jokkolabs Banjul -  Lead*
*Sait Matty Road, Bakau, Adjacent to Swedish Consulate*
*KMC, The Gambia*
*P O Box 4496 Bakau,KMC, The Gambia*
*Skype: pons_utd*
*Tel Direct Office: +220 4495115*

*Tel Mobile/Whatsapp: +220 9912508*
*www.jokkolabs.net* <http://www.jokkolabs.co>

*LinkedIn: Jokkolabs Banjul*
*Facebook: Jokkolabs Banjul*
*Twitter: @jklBanjul*




On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 1:50 PM Raúl Echeberría <raul at echeberria.org> wrote:

> Dear Livia and Jorge:
>
> Thank you very much for this document.
> It’s very very helpful.
>
> To summarize:
>
> Option A - The MHLB is separate of the MAG but strongly linked to it. It
> looks very well integrated.
>
> Option B - The MHLB is a kind of executive committee of a renovated MAG
> that is now called MAG+.
>
>
> I can live with either option. While my first approach was very similar to
> Option B, Option A is very well designed and a very good compromise.
>
>
> A few comments:
>
> Option A -
>
> . While 25 members is smaller than 50, what is very good, i think that the
> MHLB could be even smaller, around 15 people. The experience in forming the
> MAG since its inception shows clearly that is very challenging to
> accomplish ALL the balances in a small number of people, but it can be
> fixed through the rotation of members. If at a given time, the MHLB lacks
> of enough representation of a group or region, that situation should be
> improved in the following rotation. At the end of the day we have to trust
> in the members of the body.
>
>
> Option B -
>
> . It doesn’t say how large would be the leadership team (or executive
> committee). It would be good to provide some idea to show that the MHLB is
> really a subset of the MAG(+) and not 2/3 of it.
>
> . While one of the functions of the MHLB would be to provide advice to the
> Tech Envoy, a better integration with the function of the Tech Envoy would
> be desirable in my opinion. I feel that the connection between the Tech
> envoy and the MHLB should be improved in this option.
>
>
>
> To both options:
>
> The third bullet point in the functions of the MHLB (as described in para
> 93 of the roadmap), is
>
> "Relay proposed policy approaches and recommendations from the Forum (i.e.
> prepared by policy networks, such as BPFs) to appropriate normative and
> decision-making fora”
>
> That objective will not be achieved just creating a new body working with
> the support of the same secretariat (even if it is strengthened). It will
> require a lot of additional work. This is an issues we should address after
> we could finish the discussion on other points.
>
>
> Best,
>
>
> Raúl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> El 26 ago. 2020, a las 03:04, Livia Walpen via WG-Strategy <
> wg-strategy at intgovforum.org> escribió:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I hope this message finds you well. Pursuant our last call of the MAG-WG
> on Strategy, Jorge and I have been working with Anriette and Titti on a
> draft concept note on how to implement the Multistakeholder High-Level Body
> (MHLB) from Para 93(a) of the UNSG’s Roadmap on Digital Cooperation. Thanks
> very much also for the feedback from those who had most actively
> participated in this discussion, whom we have approached informally over
> the last days. J
>
> I have just uploaded the resulting draft here:
>
> *Some ideas on how to operationalize the Multistakeholder High-Level Body
> outlined in §93 (a) of the UNSG Roadmap for Digital Cooperation: *
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zk8D2ub1D9yY4y5mznDbGuqZPDdZi6NjlV38Jsv4FkI/edit?usp=sharing
>
> We have tried to factor in the discussions and ideas we have exchanged in
> this WG as well as in the Roundtable call on 27 July mostly in what is the
> consolidated and so-called Approach “A” in the draft: *operationalize
> 93(a) through a new body within the IGF, separate and complementary to the
> MAG.*
>
> In addition, the concept note contains an Approach “B”: *operationalize
> 93(a) through an in-depth reform of the MAG, *which is a text provided by
> Paul Blaker based also on ideas exchanged so far by other WG members.
>
> We hope that this draft concept note can serve as a good basis for further
> discussions and we are looking forward to the call tomorrow.
>
> Very best,
> Livia & Jorge
>
> _______________________________________________
> WG-Strategy mailing list
> WG-Strategy at intgovforum.org
> To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-strategy_intgovforum.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WG-Strategy mailing list
> WG-Strategy at intgovforum.org
> To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-strategy_intgovforum.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/wg-strategy_intgovforum.org/attachments/20200826/b3256ac6/attachment.htm>