AW: Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] Internet governance :roles of plenary and governance lists

[Fullsack Jean-Louis]

Thanks Adam for your support and particularly for clarifying the issues on
stake.

Moreover, Wolgang commits some approximations with the ITU rules (they are
based on its Constitution and Convention). Never forget they are decided
upon only by Members of States and not by Sector Members. At least up to now
!
If you want some complementary information you can find it on CSDPTT's
website www.csdptt.org (in french), under "Documents".
Of course I fully support your suggestions.

Friendly yours
Jean-Louis Fullsack


----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Peake" <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
To: <plenary at wsis-cs.org>
Cc: <wolfgang at imv.au.dk>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: AW: Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] Internet
governance :roles of plenary and governance lists


>I understand Jean Louis points, but we should make a difference
>between "informal discussions" and "formal negotiations".


Wolfgang,

With respect, I think you are being naive, and civil society is
likely being disadvantaged.

I would not go so far as to suggest that people should not
participate in the ITU workshop, of course not! And I've no doubts
that the civil society participants invited as individuals will
continue to represent the same guiding principles we we agreed
collectively. And I fully understand that a scholar or some expert (I
am not sure of how to describe "expert") invited to a specialist
meeting would not want to pretend that their work represents the
views of a broader group, and nor would they wish to compromise their
personal intellectual enterprise in some misguided effort to reach a
consensus with others, and in the context it would be as
inappropriate of us to ask. ("misguided" because Internet Governance
is not like many of the other thematic issues CS is concerned with,
we have no base agreement even among ourselves on what it means.)

But I think we are also missing a very important opportunity to make
clear that civil society is an equal player (partner/stakeholder) in
all events organized as official/semi-official events of WSIS. It is
just wrong to dismiss this workshop as some minor event that does not
matter in the WSIS process, that civil society can somehow skip it.
Utsumi is Secretary General of WSIS, ITU the lead agency and
secretariat. Utsumi has called this workshop to begin to address one
of the two main outcomes of the Geneva Summit. Writing as Secretary
General of the ITU and Secretary General of WSIS, he says this quite
clearly in a recent letter discussing the state of WSIS, from the
success Geneva to our hopes for Tunis (etc etc.)  (on the Summit
website <http://www.itu.int/wsis/utsumi2.html>) He wrote:

    "The Geneva phase also identified two major issues to be resolved
under the auspices of UN Secretary General, namely Internet
governance and financing mechanisms. To contribute to the discussion
on Internet governance, ITU will organize a workshop on 26 - 27
February in Geneva, which provides a forum for exchanging views on
definitions, viewpoints, visions and analytical studies on Internet
governance .

    I look forward to working with the many stakeholders involved in
this exciting and important undertaking. In particular, I am pleased
to begin working closely with Tunisia, the host country of the second
phase as we prepare for November 2005.

Mr. Yoshio Utsumi"


Civil society needs to be represented at this meeting, by people
selected by us, and I hope that you will help us try think how we can
achieve this. Of course money is a problem.

Note, the first prepcom for the Tunis phase will be held in the first
half of this year,
<http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_single-en-1164.asp>

Thanks,

Adam



>At this point and in this workshop there is no need to speak with
>"one voice" as "official representative" of a "stakeholder" group.
>The participating governments will have many different voices
>(united to a high degree by their understanding of "state
>sovereignty"), the participating private sector members will have
>different voices (united to a high degree by their understanding of
>"free market") and so "civil society" will have different voices
>(united to a high degree by their understandiong of "bottom up",
>"openess" and "transparency").
>
>The problem with the ITU workshop is that ITU has only governments
>and private sector as members. There is no category of civil society
>membership. Probably the ITU Workshop is a good opportunity, to
>invite ITU, to start a discussion on the introduction of a new
>category of membership in the organisation (afzer WSIS has more or
>less officially recognized civil society as an "important
>stakeholder"" / Article 49 of the WSIS Declaration).
>
>I remmeber the long debate before Kyodo 1994, when the concept of
>the "big M´s" (governments) and "small M´s" (private sector) was
>developed. It was further developped by Minneapolis 1998. After
>Marrakesh 2002, governments and private secor are de facto rather
>equal in the ITU.
>
>With the next ITU Plenipotentiary two years away (2006), this could
>be a right moment to challenge the limited openess of ITU, to
>propose a change of the ITU constitution and to introduce a third
>category of ITU membership for CSOs.
>
>And do not forget, the ITU workshop is only one event in an
>exploding long series of official or semi-official positioning
>seminars around the globe to prepare for the "big thing", the Kofi
>Annan IG Group.
>
>Best wishes
>
>wolfgang
>
>Original Nachricht--
>Von: Fullsack Jean-Louis <jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr>
>An: plenary at wsis-cs.org
>Senden: 23.01.2004
>Betreff: Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] Internet
>governance  :roles of plenary and governance lists
>
>Sorry, Wolfgang, Adam and others
>Once more the ITU Secretary general has selected his interlocutors. This is
>unacceptable for the Civil Society.
>If the CS is to participate as a speeking partner in these "panel
>discussions" we -the CS Plenary- ought to be informed previously about
>the
>content and rationale of the CS contributions and/or position. And we -the
>CS Plenary- are to designate our representative(s) accordingly.
>No closed doors negociations on behalf of the CS and please no
>"welcome" for
>Utsumi's nominal "invitations".
>Jean-Louis Fullsack
>CSDPTT
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "AIZU" <aizu at anr.org>
>To: <plenary at wsis-cs.org>;
>"Governance" <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 1:02 PM
>Subject: Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] Internet governance
>:roles of plenary and governance lists
>
>
>>  I also received an invitation from ITU a few hours ago, and
>>  am trying to modify my schedule to go.
>>
>>  I fully agree with Vittorio that we should coordinate our
>participation.
>>
>>  izumi
>>
>>
>>  At 11:04 04/01/21 +0100, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>>   >wolfgang at imv.au.dk
>ha scritto:
>>   >> Thanks Adam & Jeanette,
>>   >> this is good step forward.
>>   >> What do you think about a Caucus Website?
>>   >
>>   >Actually, I was tasked with preparing it in Geneva, and I have
>started
>>  working. I stopped when the discussion on our name & domain name
>went
>>  nowhere, but if we can accept to live with the name Adam registered on
>his
>>  own (gov-net.org), I think I can come up with an initial site by the
>next
>>  weekend. At least, I hope so.
>>   >
>>   >> I think the letter to Kofi Annan$B%((Bs office is as urgent as
>a
>letter to
>>  Utsumi. It should be short letters. Could you write a first draft?
>>   >
>>   >Support. I think our new coordinators should manage the agenda and
>get
>>  deliverables done :)
>>   >
>>   >> Concerning the letter to Utsumi, we should take note in this
>letter
>>  (and welcome), that some Caucus members has been invited by him in
>their
>>  personal capacity as experts and than propose three other names. As far
>as
>>  I know Milton and Betrand has been invited officially.
>>   >
>>   >I got an "early notice of an invitation" yesterday evening.
>(So I don't
>>  need a "ticket" from the caucus, I think.)
>>   >
>>   >An interesting note is that the invitation says that invited experts
>are
>>  supposed to express their preference on whether they would like
>"to
>>   >either introduce their contributions, make presentations and/or
>>   >participate in panel discussions". I think we should
>coordinate
>ourselves
>>  so that CS people don't end up all in the panels or all making
>>  presentations... The agenda is not clear yet, but, if we can, I think
>we
>>  should try to get a CS person in every relevant panel (assuming that
>the
>>  organizers will agree, of course...)
>>   >--
>>   >.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo vb.
>>   >Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu.org
>>   >http://bertola.eu.org/    <-- Vecchio sito, nuovo
>toblog!
>>   >
>>   >_______________________________________________
>>   >Plenary mailing list
>>   >Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>>   >http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>>   >
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>  > Plenary mailing list
>>  Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>>  http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
>_______________________________________________
>Plenary mailing list
>Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Plenary mailing list
>Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary


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