[WSIS CS-Plenary] About the general debate

[Meryem Marzouki]

Hi Jeanette,

Regarding your first question:
My idea is not to exclude anyone, but rather to use this opportunity of
the general debate to do a kind of public wrap-up of all the work made
by the CS organizations since the very beginning of the WSIS process.
After all, the Summit is supposed to adopt a Declaration of principles
and a plan of action, and, just like we reacted to the many intermediate
versions, we should provide our final opinion on the final text.
Having caucus representatives doing that is the best way to try to cover
all issues, as well as to try to have a consolidated final opinion from
CS organizations having participated to the process.

Regarding your second question:
ACtually, it way mainly a way for me to have people wake up on the
alternative declaration issue. Of course, this declaration should be
more than just a compilation of contributions. But these contributions
may provide some guidelines, or head of sections, at least.

Meryem

Le mercredi, 12 nov 2003, à 20:32 Europe/Paris, jeanette at wz-berlin.de a
écrit :


Ok, below once again my reply to Meryem,

jeanette




On 12 Nov 2003 at 9:36, Meryem Marzouki wrote:


Hi, Meryem,

I have 2 comments or better, requests for clarification.

First, I don't understand why there should be only one way to select
speakers for the general debate and why active members of
caususes should be the only source for speakers. I would imagine
that their might be suitable candidates for the general debate who
didn't have the chance to contribute to a caucus. As you know
yourself, the WSIS  is a fairly time consuming business. In my view,
it seems a bit rigid to restrict the selection of speakers to caucus
members.

My second comment refers to the alternative declaration. Do you
think it should be just a compilation of contributions without any
further attempts to form a coherent vision?

jeanette

[To the speakers list: Sorry for the delay, I've problems with the SMTP
server, so I'm now using a webmail]

Hi all,

It seems that sending long messages isn't the best way to have them
discussed. I'm then reposting my proposal on the nominations for the
general debate (NOT Opening or Round-Tables):

"- Should the participating CS organizations nominate speakers for the
general debate ?
My own answer is yes, but only if the following process is adopted.
Although CS nominations are subject to acceptance or refusal by the
executive secretariat and the ITU, and although during the Summit there
wouldn't be any chance to see the Declaration and Plan of action
modified, this general debate could be seen by CS just like the PrepComs
and Intersessions plenaries, and it could be the occasion to present our
conclusions on the Summit official texts, process and follow-up. To this
end, these CS speakers for declarations during the general debate should
be nominated following exactly the same process as for the PrepComs and
Intersessions: each caucus should have a chance to tell its conclusions.
The Content and Themes groups should be in charge of coordinating these
nominations, and propose relevant merging if there are more proposals
than speaking slots.
The compilation of such declarations by caucuses could be a very good
alternative declaration from CS."

Thus, I would like to have your comments on that.

Meryem


------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
Plenary mailing list
Plenary at wsis-cs.org
http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary