[WSIS CS-Plenary] Request for Comments : Government contributions for Hammamet

[Rik Panganiban]

Bertrand,

This an excellent summary of the state-of-play of the various positions 
of the governments.  I don't know how much we can develop a consensus 
position among the various groups represented in the WSIS on these 
organizational issues.  However I think we can all agree that whatever 
meetings are approved by the Prepcom, whether Prepcoms, regional 
meetings and thematic meetings, should have rules of procedure that 
ensure minimum standards of transparency and participation.  That is:

*	Information about the holding of thematic and regional meetings 
should be sent out widely to all stakeholders and other interested 
parties with sufficient advance notice to ensure adequate time to 
prepare for participation.

*	Rules of procedure of thematic and regional meetings should allow for 
meaningful civil society participation, including the ability to 
distribute documents and to make verbal interventions.

*	Accreditation to any thematic and regional meetings should be open to 
all WSIS stakeholders, and ideally beyond to those who are not 
accredited to the official process but have critical viewpoints and 
expertise related to the meeting in question.

*	Mechanisms for online contributions and participation in thematic and 
regional meetings should be made possible for those who are not able to 
travel to the various venues.

Rik Panganiban

On 21 juin 04, at 15:15, Bertrand de LA CHAPELLE wrote:

>
> Dear friends,
>
> Some governments have made contributions in the perspective
> of the Hammamet meeting that are posted on the Executive
> Secretariat web site. They basically address the following
> themes :
>
> - The opportunity and content of a Political Declaration in
> Tunis
> - The structure and format of the Tunis Summit
> - The organization of the preparatory process
> - The need for mechanisms for the post-Tunis period
>
> I encourage you to read them - particularly those from
> Canada, Switzerland and the European Union.
>
> Across these themes, some points of potential convergence
> emerge and are briefly outlined below.
>
> As civil society is likely to be taking the floor at least
> three times for about 15 minutes, they may be worth
> discussing on the Plenary list to see whether civil society
> supports them or not, or has other priorities. These points
> are in no way a complete description of all comments
> submitted.
>
> I – USING THE 11 THEMES IDENTIFIED IN GENEVA
>
> The first phase of the WSIS process has identified 11 Themes
> that structure the Declaration of Principles and Plan of
> Action adopted in Geneva :
> • Role of governments and other stakeholders in the promotion
> of ICTs for Development
> • Information and Communication Infrastructure
> • Access to Information and Knowledge
> • Capacity Building
> • Building confidence and Security in the use of ICTs
> • Enabling environment
> • ICT Applications
> • Cultural Diversity and Identity, Linguistic Diversity and
> Local Content
> • Media
> • Ethical Dimensions of the Information Society
> • International and Regional Cooperation
>
> Several contributions mention these themes could help
> structure the preparatory process, the various Thematic
> events to take place in the period leading up to Tunis and
> the Tunis Summit itself.
>
> As a matter of fact, themes 1 and 11 could be grouped
> separately, as they relate more to implementation mechanisms
> (national e-strategies and international organizations.
>
> what is the position of civil society on tusin this list of
> themes, knowing that :
> - the priority order may not be the one that civil society
> would prefer
> - it is clear that this list will not be reopened for
> discussion before Tunis
> - a list of sub-themes contained in the Action Plan
> (see "List of summit themes" on the wsis-online web site)
> could provide some additional "hooks" to put issues on the
> Agenda
>
>
> II – KEEPING THE GENEVA FORMAT FOR TUNIS
>
> It is proposed to organized Tunis, like Geneva, around  a
> plenary session, plus “summit events” with conferences and
> exhibitions.
>
> Canada (supported by Switzerland) proposes in addition to
> organize the summit events around the 11 themes in the form
> of “@tents”, that is distinct spaces devoted to each theme,
> with multistakeholder participation.
>
> They also suggest that 3-4 small “Advisory groups” be
> responsible for clusters of 3-4 themes. They would be
> composed of actors from the 4 constituencies (governments,
> international organizations, civil society and private
> sector) and oversee the organization of the “@tents” with up
> to 11 sub-groups.
>
> Setting up of these groups would be the responsibility of the
> Executive Secretariat.
>
> What does civil society think of these notions ?
>
> III – THEMATIC MEETINGS
>
> Thematic meetings, potentially along the 11 themes above,
> should help structure the preparatory phase .
>
> The European Union has outlined a list of possible criteria
> for a meeting to be granted the label “WSIS Thematic
> Meeting” :
> • the meeting is being organised on the initiative of a
> recognised WSIS stakeholder from a  government, the civil
> society, the private sector or an appropriate international
> organisation;
> • the subject matter is relevant  to the WSIS agenda;
> • the outcomes of such meetings could be fed into the WSIS
> preparatory process proper for noting or endorsement by
> stakeholders, as they deem fit;
> • participation in the meeting is open to all WSIS
> stakeholders and, as far as possible, financial costs of
> participation should not be prohibitive;
> • the meeting has no financial implications for the WSIS
> budget.
>
> What is civil society's position ? Should it in particular
> support the criteria that an event should be open to all
> stakeholders to be qualified as Thematic Event ?
>
> IV – STOCK – TAKING
>
> Several contributions rightly underscore the need for a
> comprehensive stock-taking exercise during the coming months,
> by governments and international organizations but also by
> private sector and civil society entities to identify “who
> does (or could do) what” in each of the 11 Themes.
>
> This opens up the question : How to organize in the most
> efficient, economic and useful way such a stock-taking
> exercise among 200 countries, more than 25 intergovernmental
> organizations and several hundreds of civil society entities
> and private sector companies ?
>
> How would civil society like to take part in such a stock-
> taking exercise ?
>
>
> V – MORE GENERALLY
>
> Many of these comments (in particular EU, Canada,
> Switzerland) reaffirm the need to involve civil society, even
> more so now that we are moving “from Principles to Action”
> and get into the implementation phase. This is recommended
> for the preparatory process, the summit itself (in particular
> in the organization of Summit Events) and in the organization
> of Thematic Events.
>
> The European Union stresses the need for limited PrepComs (2
> are suggested, one in the winter of 2004-2005) and the othr
> one in September 2005, and Australia recommends short ones
> used mostly to review reports on progress at the thematic or
> regional levels.
>
> Finally, several comments insist on not reopening the debate
> on the documents adopted in Geneva, and aiming at a short and
> strong Politicla Document (A “visionary Chair’s Statement on
> the importance of the Information Society” in Canada’s view,
> a “political preamble reaffirming the commitment to
> implementation of the DoP and PoA, and an more operative
> part” for the EU).
>
> These various aspects could be discussed during the
> orientation session on the 23rd and comments on the plenary
> from those who cannot participate in Hammamet are certainly a
> useful input.
>
> Best to all
>
> Bertrand
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  Rik Panganiban             email: rikp at earthlink.net
  UN Reporting & Advocacy    tel: (+1) 917-710-5524
  Civil Society Organizer

** My new book on e-Democracy and the United Nations
can be downloaded at 
http://rikomatic.objectis.net/work/edemocracyver0304c.pdf  **
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 8144 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20040624/f45fd54b/attachment.bin