[WSIS CS-Plenary] [SPAM] Deconstructing "Multi-Stakeholderism"

[Chun Eung Hwi]

Dear Arne and all,


Thank you for your good information! 
I fully agree to the thinking of "If the legitimization card is played
strategically, and if all possible alternatives to participation are taken
serious, then those organisations could move from the margins to the very
centre of the WSIS process"

But, unfortunately, such a serious strategic consideration seems to be not
taken in this plenary. What I could hear last a few days was only
nomination of speakers around round table or somewhere else is happening.
I can understand that such efforts would also be done for making civil
society more impact on this process. However, quite frankly, I am very
suspicous that such efforts could also function as a part of
legitimization of WSIS. If not, strategic discussion should be taken
together with those nominations. In my thinking, many people are keeping
in mind "non-negotiables" as a bottom line of civil society concession.  
Then, I easily guess that those non-negotiables will be mostly denied to
be accepted in official documents. Then, when and where, who will decide
next action? And what cards do we have? Is it clear at the moment, at 
PrepCom IIIa?


regards,

Chun


On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, arne wrote:

> Hi all!
> As the latest "WSIS E-Flash" leads with another story on participatory 
> appraches, we thought some of you might be interested in a piece of 
> analysis on this issue which we have recently put up on the site. Read 
> more on www.worldsummit2003.org/.de.
> Good luck to all at Prep3a!
> Arne
> 
> ----------------------
> 
> Multi-Stakeholder Process as Safety-Belt
> Civil Society legitimation is crucial for WSIS
> 
> The recent initiative by the president of the WSIS preparatory 
> committee to solve issues of conflict between governments has once more 
> highlighted the role of civil society organisations as legitimizing 
> force of the summit. Even before the decisive negotiations with 
> government delegations, Mr Samassekou approached the civil society 
> Content&Themes group to find out which sections of his "non-paper" it 
> would not support. So, although NGOs dont sit at the negotiating table 
> and dont offer any quantifiable trading issues, their support is being 
> valued higher than that of some governments.
> 
> The negotiating position of civil society is based on the 
> "multi-stakeholder process". The latter describes a main goal of the 
> WSIS: the participation of all concerned social forces in the summit 
> process. Not only governments, but also business and civil society are 
> called upon to take part in the WSIS and to support its outcomes.
> 
> During the third preparatory conference PrepCom3, it became 
> increasingly obvious that the opportunities for civil society to 
> participate in the summit process are by no means the result of a 
> gracious gesture by the WSIS organisers. Rather, letting NGOs 
> participate has served to integrate potentially critical voices. A 
> repetition of scenes of street confrontation, as in Seattle, Genoa, or 
> just recently during the G8 summit in Geneva itself, damaging as they 
> would be to publicity efforts, had to be prevented. Thus the 
> "multi-stakeholder approach" has represented a direct response both to 
> the summit protests of the past years and to the lack of legitimacy of 
> large government summits, which had been highlighted by those protests.
> 
> At PrepCom3, even the most cautious points of criticism by the 
> essentially excluded and thereby frustrated NGOs led to sensitive 
> reactions by the WSIS secretariat, the governments, and PrepCom 
> President Samassekou. Attempts to pacify and accomodate civil society 
> were triggered, particularly, by plans for an alternative civil society 
> declaration as that document would have the potential to destroy the 
> carefully nurtured impression of broad civil society support to the 
> official WSIS declaration (also see the article "Civil Society 
> organisations will draft own declaration" on this website).
> 
> At the same time, many civil society representatives present at 
> PrepCom3 developed an increasingly critical awareness of their own role 
> as a legitimizing force. Civil society meetings discussed the limits of 
> lobbying, agreed on "non-negotiables" to serve as landmarks for either 
> supporting or rejecting the WSIS declaration, and the final civil 
> society press statement started with the words: "If governments 
> continue to exclude our principles, we will not lend legitimacy to the 
> final official WSIS documents".
> 
> Due to the inability of government delegations to develop a meaningful 
> and substance-rich declaration, the multi-stakeholder character of the 
> summit has become even more crucial since PrepCom3. The official press 
> statement at the end of PrepCom3 does not emphasize the (poor) thematic 
> outcomes of the WSIS but rather carries the heading: "Summit Breaks New 
> Ground with Multi-Stakeholder Approach". As the only true innovation 
> left from the previously high aims of the summit, the multi-stakeholder 
> approach must now guarantee the success of the summit.
> 
> It is exactly this dilemma which offers an increased negotiating 
> position to those civil society organisations involved in the WSIS. If 
> the legitimization card is played strategically, and if all possible 
> alternatives to participation are taken serious, then those 
> organisations could move from the margins to the very centre of the 
> WSIS process.
> 
> What could be helpful is the fact that a broad network of a variety of 
> events is currently developing between "inside" and "outside". While 
> some have rejected the legitimization game from the outset and have 
> been planning alternative events outside the WSIS framework under the 
> name "WSIS? We Seize!" , others are occupying the cutting edges between 
> participation and fundamental criticism, for example with the World 
> Forum on Communication Rights or the Community Media Forum. The 
> bandwith of possible interventions is large, civil society is not 
> dependent on lobbying, and this certainty could (and should) raise the 
> minimum level for civil society legitimation of the summit.
> 
> 

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Chun Eung Hwi
General Secretary, PeaceNet | phone:     (+82)  2-2166-2205
Seoul Yangchun P.O.Box 81   |   pcs:     (+82) 019-259-2667
Seoul, 158-600, Korea  	    | eMail:   chun at peacenet.or.kr
------------------------------------------------------------