[WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [WSIS-CT] John Gagain's note: Does Civil Society Plenary not exist?
Rik Panganiban
rikp at bluewin.ch
Thu Jul 24 14:37:33 BST 2003
Hi Sean, et al,
Agreed on all points. I have always understood that the Bureau and
Content and Themes exist based on mandates received by the civil
society PLENARY meetings. They continue to be subject to the Plenary.
Our process has been that documents emanating from C&T are submitted to
the plenary for discussion, refinement and then individual sign-ons. In
Paris, in the absence of many groups being physically present, much of
this refinement and discussion took place online, as well as the
sign-on process.
"Plenary" in this sense is the most universal, open forum of civil
society invested with authority that is confers on its sub-agencies,
the Bureau and content and themes. This is in contrast to a smaller
working group or a caucus which can only be said to be speaking on
behalf of their members and not civil society as a whole, unless a
statement is submitted to plenary for subsequent approval.
Hope that clarifies and doesn't obfuscate.
Rik Panganiban
WFM
On Jeudi, juillet 24, 2003, at 02:57 PM, Sean O Siochru wrote:
> Hi everyone
>
> I think John's surprising note, and the position he takes in it on
> civil society structures, offers us an opportunity to remind ourselves
> of the basic progress we have made so far in civil society. This note
> is seeking your support on five basic point below.
>
> At 15:27 23/07/2003 -0400, John R. Gagain Jr. wrote [my bold]:
>
> Concerning the modalities of the CS mechanisms at the WSIS:
>
> 1. CS Information Session and Debriefing. There does not exist a forum
> at the WSIS referred to as "Civil Society Plenary", nor was there ever
> one at any other U.N. sponsored Summit in the past. A Plenary
> signifies a fixed group of members or member states and the actual
> official definition is: 1. Complete in all respects, unlimited or
> full: a diplomat with plenary powers, 2. Fully attended by all
> qualified members: a plenary session of the council. As you can see,
> Civil Society does not fulfill this definition or its prerequisites.
> ....
> 2. [snip] ... , as I mention above, there is no CS Plenary; and
> especially not one that makes decisions on behalf of Civil Society. T
>
> In one sense, it is refreshing to hear such definitive, authoritative,
> statements about how Civil Society is organised at the WSIS. (Why
> didn't someone tell us this two years ago?)
>
> More seriously, though, I cannot accept that the 'Civil Society
> Plenary' meetings that I attended at Prepcom 1 at PrepCom 2, and that
> were held in Paris, did not in fact take place as such, and that these
> meetings had no authority to take decisions on behalf of civil society
> at the WSIS. Such a claim, especially from a member of the Civil
> Society Bureau, really must be refuted. As a member of the Bureau
> myself, this is certainly not an official view and this is the first
> time I have heard it aired.
>
> (By the same token, John could even define the Bureau out of existence
> on the basis that one has never previously existed at Un conferences.
> Even more, since in reality, the SOLE source of legitimacy for the
> Bureau is the Civil Society Plenary, and since the Bureau itself has
> explicitly agreed it is subject to the Civil Society Plenary, then
> surely the Bureau cannot exist!)
>
> Nice and all as it is to fantasize, there are some important facts and
> achievements of civil society in the WSIS process that I think are
> worth reaffirming.
>
> 1. Civil Society has constituted itself into a Plenary at every
> convening of the WSIS, PrepComs, Intercessional, Summits. It is open
> to all of civil society members and of course any organisations is
> free not to participate. But the great majority have chosen to. It
> is the ultimate decision making body of civil society in relation to
> the WSIS.
>
> 2. It has endorsed the existence of the Bureau, and the Bureau has
> agreed explicitly that it is subject to the Civil Society Plenary
> Meeting and must report to it regularly.
>
> 3. The CS Plenary Meeting has endorsed the Content and Themes Group,
> which also reports to it. And it has endorsed most if not all of the
> various caucuses, working groups and so forth.
>
> 4. The Civil Society Division of the Secretariat serves the Civil
> Society Plenary Meeting and anything the Plenary sets up, although it
> can also provide support to any groups who choose not to associate
> with the Plenary.
>
> 5. Regarding the (currently important) operation of the CS Plenary
> between physical meetings, the following was agreed by the Civil
> Society Plenary at PrepCom 2 (extract from the Description of the
> plenary at wsis-cs.org list)
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
> "The Civil Society Plenary Meeting, when convened, is the source of
> legitimacy for all civil society activities in the WSIS.
> Between PrepComs a 'Virtual CS Plenary Group' has been created
> (plenary at wsis-cs.org), comprising organisations and other entities
> accredited and registered at both PrepComs to date, from civil
> society, although organisations with a key interest in the issues but
> that are not part of the Summit process should also have the
> opportunity to participate.
> The list will not be a decision-making space, in the sense that no
> voting will be called for, but a space to promote greater debate and
> transparency in the organisation of Civil Society during the
> summit." [my bold]
>
> The CS-Plenary list (plenary at wsis-cs.org) was subsequently set up and
> now has over 250 registered, all of whom in the interests of
> accountability an transparency have registered their names when
> joining the list. Thus, the CS-Plenary list is a space to promote
> debate and transparency in civil society overall in between physically
> convened Civil Society Plenary groups. I believe all major issues and
> proposals should be openly debated there before any decisions are
> taken by other groups, such as the Bureau and the Content & Themes
> Group. I also believe that many decisions must be reaffirmed at the
> opening Civil Society Plenary at PrepCom 3, if there have been widely
> different views expressed on it.
>
> This structure may not be perfect, but it is all we have, it has wide
> support, and has been endorsed at all major civil meetings and venues
> at the WSIS. I really think at this point that we all have to be
> working from the same basics. There are too many important issues
> facing us right now to run the risk of destroying the structures we
> have so painstakingly put together.
>
> I am seeking support for the above five points from those on this list
> as I believe we cannot be continually reinventing the past and must
> move forward. I will also be communicating on these matters within the
> Bureau.
>
> Very best
>
> Sean
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Seán Ó Siochrú Central office: tel: +353 1 473 0599 fax: +353 1 473
> 0597
> NEXUS Research Mobile: +353 87 20 48 150
> 14 Eaton Brae Direct office tel: +353 1 272 0739 fax: +353 1 272
> 0034
> Shankill
> Co. Dublin e-mail: sean at nexus.ie
> Ireland Web site: http://www.iol.ie/nexus
>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rik Panganiban email: rikp at bluewin.ch
Special Adviser tel: +41 22 734 9774
World Federalist Movement Fax: +41 22 734 9775
www.wfm.org Mobile: +41 76 473 3274
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 7881 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20030724/f0e12bf6/attachment.bin
More information about the Plenary
mailing list