[WSIS CS-Plenary] suggestions for Civil Society Coordination at PrepCom3 (and the summit)

[Amali De Silva]

I am glad that there is a process for including those CS members new to the process, or reconnecting. 
 
CS is only going to be as strong as the number of groups that CS can proclaim to represent - not just a couple of voices from a few sectors, regions etc. Support comes from inclusivity rather than exculsivity. 
 
I look forward to reading and contributing to the daily updates. There is a real danger that if transparency is not a key element of the discussions that we will lose credibility.
 
Thank you in advance!
 
Amali De Silva-Mitchell, Vice President, Vancouver Community Network, Canada.
 


Rik Panganiban <rikp at bluewin.ch> wrote:
Ralf,

This is good strategic document that I think gets us closer to the 
kind of coordinated functioning that Civil Society should aim towards. 
However, in terms of what is possible to get together between now and 
September, I think your overall scheme is ambitious. Let me suggest 
something perhaps more achievable.

COORDINATING GROUP-->> DAILY COORDINATING MEETING
I think the functions of creating an information, coordination center 
for civil society are necessary, however having a fully-equipped and 
staffed room for the whole prepcom and summit is probably unlikely to 
materialize.

On the weekend prior to the prepcom and the Summit, we should have 
orientation sessions for those who are brand-new to the process, so we 
don't waste too much time re-explaining things. Like past prepcoms, 
there should be convened every morning a general civil society meeting 
where reports from the previous day can be received, general 
announcements made, and some discussion of important issues. In 
addition, I believe we need at least every other day a session for 
newcomers to ask general questions about the WSIS, an open forum with a 
couple of veterans who can answer most basic questions that we don't 
have time to deal with in the main plenaries.

LOBBYING GROUP->> PART OF CONTENT AND THEMES
I think a lobbying group should grow organically out of the Content and 
Themes based on what immediate issues arise each day. Often the same 
people in C&T are also the ones doing the most govt lobbying anyway, so 
creating a new group with the same people seems redundant.

Respectfully,

Rik Panganiban
WFM

On Lundi, juillet 21, 2003, at 03:19 PM, Ralf Bendrath wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> it was good to see many of you in Paris, and I think in the end we can
> be quite satisfied with what we did. Of course, as usual we could do
> better, especially with more coordination of our activities, a bit more
> transparency and better
> pooling of ressources.
>
> This is an attempt to kick off a discussion on CS coordination at
> PrepCom 3, which will also help for the same task at the summit itself.
>
> By this I mean the "inside" activities like monitoring, lobbying,
> content and themes drafting, press work etc. The "outside" and "half 
> in,
> half out" activities like the Polymedia Lab or the World Forum on
> Communication Rights are already being organized in other spaces.
>
> It is not about content, but about how to structure all our work in
> order to be more effective and keep everybody better informed on what 
> is
> going on. This should help us enable better and more equal 
> participation
> of the whole civil society (on location and elsewhere), make better use
> of our ressources, and in the end have a bigger impact on the summit
> outcomes.
>
> We should prepare well in advance, that is why I suggest to start this
> discussion now. There are already some deadlines, e.g. Louise from the
> CS secretariat at ITU wants to have a list of what we need from them at
> PrepCom3 by this week. And the impressions from Paris are still fresh,
> so we can better think of what went well and what could be improved.
>
> *** Where to discuss this?
> In order to not generate another "Spam" problem on this plenary list, I
> suggest that we set up another list, coordination at wsis-cs.org, and
> discuss the details there. Karen: Can you do this? (BTW: Karen and
> others did a great job coordinating in Paris!)
>
> I am looking forward to see your ideas and enthusiasm in helping to get
> this going.
>
> All the best,
>
> Ralf
>
> -------------
>
> Civil Society Coordination at PrepCom3 (and at the summit)
> Ideas and suggestions, version 0.3
>
> compiled by Ralf Bendrath, www.worldsummit2003.org,
> 
>
> 19 July 2003
>
> - first draft: circulated in a small group after discussions at
> PrepCom2, February 2003
> - second draft: including written feedback from Karen Banks, Eva
> Hartmann, Rik Panganiban, Chantal Peyer (sorry for forgetting anybody),
> May 2003
> - third draft: updated and refined after further discussions at Paris
> Intersessional, added part III, 21 July 2003
>
> Civil Society participation and influence at PrepCom 2 and in Paris
> turned out quite good, though there are some differences on what we
> really achieved. However, a lot of things on our side were done on an 
> ad
> hoc basis, and we should think about how to make sure we get this done
> again or even better next time. Some things were not done at all, more
> coordination between the different working groups and a central info
> point for example were clearly missing. And then there are a lot of
> ideas on what could have been done with some more ressources and
> volunteers. This paper attempts to kick of the discussion and
> preparation in time.
>
> Content:
> I. Guiding Priciples
> II. Proposed Structure for Civil Society Coordination
> III. What we need from the CS Secretariat
>
> -------------------
>
>
> I. Guiding Priciples
>
> We should adhere to some basic principles in organizing our work at
> PrepCom3.
>
> 1. Transparency
> If we claim transparency from the governments, we should show how
> transparency could work in our own actions. This should include:
> - publishing all our working documents (on the web or wherever).
> - having all sessions open and announced in a manner anyone interested
> is able to attend them
> - maybe even having a live-stream from our sessions, like there was 
> from
> the intergovernmental plenary at PrepCom2.
> - writing minutes for all our sessions and publishing them
>
> 2. Participation
> We should always have in mind the people who are not able to come to
> Geneva. They depend on us for the latest infos on what is going on, and
> we depend on (some of) them for their input and ideas in our lobbying
> work. The "info security" caucus for example consisted at least of two
> persons not present in Geneva and Paris, but who were actively 
> involved.
> This principle also should help us think of all the interested people 
> in
> Geneva who do not belong to the "inner circle" (whatever this is).
> This would not mean using one huge global list, but trying to identify
> focal points who will agree to act as links, who can synthesize,
> summarise and contextualise information coming from the prepcom for
> people at the national level or for specific issue areas, and
> faciliating responses back to whatever mechanisms we agree to setup.
> Whithout these 'animators', who would need to be in place quite soon,
> and who could possibly also need to be resourced, we can't hope to
> really generate any remote input.
> This should include:
> - transparency (see above)
> - possibilities for electronic input (worked a bit via the 
> prep1/plenary
> and CT lists, but could be improved)
> - voting mechanisms, in case they are needed?
> - conference calls / videoconferences (like the one CPSR organized at
> PrepCom3)
> - maybe more important: email and low tech approaches?
>
> 3. Technology
> We should use the summit process for showing how technology _can_ help
> make the world a better place. This would show that it is possible and
> at the same time give our arguments more weight - we are the experts 
> and
> the practicioners! This could include:
> - no use of MS word or other proprietary standards. I prefer rtf of
> plain ASCII for the moment.
> - using tech tools for improving transparency and participation
> - using peer2peer technology for distributed work (on the drafts, if
> possible, or on other tasks)
> - live-feed of the monitors in the plenary sessions to IRC or 
> elsewhere,
> with the possibility for real-time comments and analysis via the
> internet (I imagine something like this : "ONLINE CS PARTICIPANT FROM
> KOREA: last comment from delegation XYZ is dangerous. It would imply
> ABC, and they have already tried this at the asian regional conf.")
> - have a screen, in a room for CS, which broadcasts comments which 
> could
> include extracts from email messages, realtime chats, etc.
> - have a videofeed from the sessions broadcast over the internet
>
> 4. Scalability
> Whatever we do should be scalable depending on how many folks we can 
> get
> to help out. It isn't fair just to put all the work onto the backs of 
> a
> couple of dedicated volunteers. We definitely need more "soldiers" and
> less "generals", as someone put it.
>
> 5. Diversity / Representation
> We must do everything we can to encourage/support greater 
> participation,
> and create greater space, for organisations and participants from the
> south. We also have to ensure regional and gender balance. The Paris
> intersessional meeting was clearly dominated by people from the North,
> and even at PrepCom2, where the numbers where more equal, the important
> pulling of strings and the work for the common cause (like reporting or
> chairing) was mainly done by people from the North.
>
> -------------------
>
>
> II. Proposed Structure for Civil Society Coordination
>
> This is an attempt to describe what could be done to make full use of
> our possibilities. The general idea is for civil society to be better
> coordinated than the governments and therefore to be able to
> "outmaneuver" them. A structure somewhat along the following lines 
> seems
> useful.
> It is so far just differentiated along functional lines. What we still
> need to develop would be some sort of "workflow": How do we organize 
> our
> common and coordination work in relation to all the families, caucuses
> and working groups? And what structure for the day would be the best
> (the evening sessions in Paris turned out extremely helpful, for
> example)?
>
> 1. Coordinating group
> - establish a designated room as information and coordination office,
> staffed during all the summit activities
> - eqipped with computers (yes, and printers), internet, phone/fax, copy
> machine
> - stay updated on all CS activities
> - coordinate / synchronise activities of
> - CS bureau
> - Lobbying group
> - Drafting group
> - Monitoring group
> - Communications group
> - Technical support group
> - Translation group
> - work with CS plenary to develop strategies and tactics as necessary
> - react immediately to important developments
> - ensure that meetings are coordinated and not clashing as often as 
> they
> were during PrepCom2
> - answer requests from CS activists and others
> - document CS activities
> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and
> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions.
>
> 2. WSIS Civil Society Bureau
> - fuse input from different CS "families"
> - act as link to governmental bureau, PrepCom3 chairpersons and WSIS CS
> secretariat
> - work on procedures for CS participation
> - act as lobbying group on procedural issues
> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and
> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions.
>
> 3. Lobbying group
> - coordinate with monitoring group to identify "friends and foes" and
> "maybes" (maybe one group with monitors?)
> - coordinate lobbying activities of CS activists
> - make sure coherent messages are pushed forward
> - coordinate with CS delegates who are members of national government
> delegations (so far, we know of Switzerland, Denmark, Germany, maybe
> Canada again. Who else?)
> - coordinate closely with content and themes group. Proposal: a meeting
> every evening between those two groups to identify the main points on
> which to lobby the next days according to the situation among states
> (lobby/monitor informations) and in the content and themes group.
> - maybe: provide negotiating and diplomacy training for lobbying group
> volunteers
> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and
> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions.
>
> 4. Content and Themes Drafting group
> Contact: Sally Burch , Bill McIver
> 
> - should have a designated room for their work
> - equipped qith a video beamer
> - translation service on demand
> - fuse input of thematic working groups and caucuses on content, themes
> and action plan
> - react to government drafts
> - draft own CS summit declaration
> - coordinate with monitoring and lobbying groups for pushing the CS
> ideas at right time and place
> - coordinate with communications group for press releases and
> conferences
> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and
> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions.
>
> 5. Monitoring group
> Contact: Rik Panganiban 
> - monitor intergovernmental sessions
> - assign volunteers for the time slots
> - alert lobbying and drafting groups on urgent issues
> - produce instant protocols for further analysis and publication
> - Stream protocols via live-feed (IRC?) to the internet; analysis and
> comments could then be produced with participation of remote monitors 
> in
> other parts of the world. The question is how much it adds, apart from 
> a
> sense of immediacy. After all, if it is not possible to respond
> immediately to government even if you are on the spot, then there is
> little advantage to going to a lot of trouble to enable others to have
> the message without the ability to respond. Perhaps it could be used
> selectively, on key decisions. On the other hand, if people take
> electronic notes anyway, why not try a live feed if possible?
> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and
> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decision. (This
> is less so important for this group, as it mainly provides a service 
> and
> does not make real decisions.)
>
> 6. Communications group
> - Maintain contacts with press and general public
> - Coordinate with content and themes and lobbying groups on "spin of 
> the
> day"
> - Feed the latest info to CS listservers
> - produce and publish press releases / newsletters
> - prepare press conferences
> - coordinate webmasters of different websites. Worldsummit2003.org,
> prepcom.net and crisinfo.org were quite good at this at PrepCom2 and in
> Paris.
> - Observe and analyse news stories on WSIS
> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and
> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decision.
>
> 7. Technical support group
> - Develop concepts for innovative use of tech tools for CS activities
> - Present the innovative use of tech tools to the public, in
> coordination with communications group
> - Provide technical coordination and setup for CS coordination office
> - Act as liaison with WSIS / ITU tech departments
> - Act as help desk for CS coordinating group
> - inform the civil society plenary about their activities and
> strategies, get feed backs from CS in general on their decisions. (This
> is less so important for this group, as it mainly provides a service 
> and
> does not make real decisions. But as you know, code is law and
> technology has its own politics...)
>
> 8. Translation group
> - coordinate the volunteers onsite and online for translation of CS
> documents and interpretation services. This mainly seems to be needed
> for French, Spanish, Portugese and several Asian languages.
> - coordinate with UN volunteers on this.
>
>
> --------------------
>
>
> III. What we need from the CS Secretariat
>
> (!! We have to inform the WSIS CS Secretariat - i.e. Louise - by next
> week. Karen Banks is working on this and urgently needs input. !!)
>
> 1. designated office space for CS coordination group
> ideally equipped with:
> - at least 10 PCs and a printer
> - Internet Connectivity: wireless and at least 10 LAN cords for laptops
> (wi-fi did not work with all laptops in Geneva and in Paris)
> - copy machine
> - telephone and fax
> - flipchart / board
> - located very close to the meeting rooms
>
> 2. designated room for the CS Content and Themes Drafting group
> - next door to the CS coordination office
> - reserved all the time only for the CT Drafting Group
> - video beamer for drafting in the group
>
> 3. more rooms
> - at least three or four more rooms for meetings of caucuses, families
> etc.
>
> 4. translation / interpretation services
> - live interpretation on demand for CT drafting group and caucus /
> family meetings
> - translation service for CS documents
> - languages: at least english, french, spanish. What else?
>
> 5. What else???
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=





Amali De Silva AAT(CMABC), BSc(Hons) Econ, PgDip Acc/Fin, MSc Int. Acc/Fin

Tel: 604-736-9012 & Email: amalidesilva at yahoo.com

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20030724/9d955adc/attachment.htm