The preparation of 2014 IGF: The improvement of the Internet access in the enclosed developing countries towards the reduction of the cost of Internet connection
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 is not yet revealed by Virginia (Ginger) Paque who disclosed the list of the nominees of civil society on http://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 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 nominations.
Prof Antoine KANTIZA, Master UTICEF,
Webmaster à la Radio-Télévision Nationale du Burundi