[WSIS CS-Plenary] OVERVIEW: Civil Society elements, ways of working and preparation

Sat Feb 12 23:19:47 GMT 2005

Karen,

Thanks a lot for this effort of clarification and the sharing of your 
document with us.
As one of the human rights caucus coordinators, I would like to remind 
everyone that the HR caucus never wanted to be associated to the CS 
Bureau, since its creation during PrepCom2 of WSIS I.

This is by no mean because the caucus doesn't agree on the existence of 
a CS Bureau or any other structure of this kind: this is needed, 
provided that:
(1) the role of the CS Bureau is well defined
(2) its way of operation is democratic (which obvioulsky includes 
transparency)
(3) its composition is legitimate

I'm sorry to say, once again, that these basic and natural requirements 
are not fullfilled and have never been. At PrepCom2 of phase 1, the 
civil society part of the executive secretariat (CSD) came up with this 
strange notion of 'families' (while regional and thematic caucuses were 
already formed), and an arbitrary identification of some 'families' 
that should be represented (a strange mixture where some 'families' 
were identified by the legal status of their members, others by their 
region of operation and others by themes or issues dealt with).
Not to mention in which conditions some 'families focal points' were 
'elected' or designated.

The HR caucus has always refused to legitimate or even acknowledge this 
kind of behavior.

I think it would have no meaning to try to 'fix' anything on such wrong 
basis, even with the best intentions. I also think that if we don't 
seriously tackle this issue and have a true discussion, hopefully 
reaching a common position, on that before the end of WSIS, we would 
create a very dangerous precedent for other summits.

This is why I would like us to devote enough time to such a discussion, 
and I support Karen's proposal below as a starting point.

Finally, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that (for 
those who will be able to attend) not everyone can devote two weeks out 
of work (given that many of us participate to WSIS besides their actual 
job), and that not everyone can afford staying two weeks in Geneva, 
sometimes at their own expenses. This means that not all caucuses will 
meet on Monday Feb. 14th. As a matter of fact, the HR caucus wont be 
able to do that, since many of its members will arrive later, though 
some will be present on the 14th.

As far as Milton's question is concerned ("If caucuses are to be 
represented on CSB, how does one form a caucus, or are the current ones 
set in stone forever? And how does one abolish a caucus that is no 
longer populated or functional?"), which is very relevant, my opinion 
is that a major part of the answer relies on transparency of the 
caucuses, in terms of members, purpose, and activity.
As an example, all the information on the HR caucus can be found at:
http://www.iris.sgdg.org/actions/smsi/hr-wsis/

I am not sure all the caucuses (not to mention 'families') may comply 
with this transparency requirement. Some actually do, many others do 
not.

Best regards,
Meryem

Le samedi, 12 fév 2005, à 22:24 Europe/Paris, karen banks a écrit :

> dear all,
>
> In light of the current discussions with respect:
>
> - the Civil Society Bureau
> - the Civil Society plenary, Content and themes group, caucuses
> - new ways of working
>
> background to CS organising during Phase I
> ------------------------------------------
> I thought i'd share an *informational* document i wrote some time ago 
> which outlines, briefly, the various elements of Civil Society and how 
> it worked during _Phase I of WSIS_.
>
> It does not reflect any of my personal or organisational views on 
> issues such as the evolution of the Civil Society Bureau (of which i 
> have several and they are well known to some ;)), nor recommendations 
> for how our ways of working might evolve.
>
> It is intended as a brief overview for those who aren't as familiar 
> with the various CS elements and how we worked in an operational sense 
> during Phase I. (i shared it with some government delegates for 
> example, who were confused about how Civil society operated, when 
> dealing with some of the challenges during hammamet).
>
> I offer it as such, not as a document to guide any future 
> developments, as that work is being led by the newly formed 'working 
> methods' group, the CSB etc.
>
> I apologise that the document is only available in english.
>
> the CSB proposals
> -----------------
> in addition, the CSB has been working similarily to evaluate, assess 
> and make proposals for re-organising
>
> the proposal renate has posted for me, is a positive step forward. 
> yes, there were/are many concerns about the origins and evolution of 
> the CSB but our options are to either continue airing those concerns, 
> or, to once and for all come to some resolution as to the role and 
> functiong of the CSB - and how it fits with the other CS elements.
>
> We must identify clearly and once and for all, what the role of the 
> CSB is.
>
> If there is no role, the solution should be simple, but i don't think 
> that is the case.
>
> If there is a role, let's define it clearly - everything should follow 
> from there including how to re-constitute the group, and how it should 
> conduct it's work.
>
> I apologise in advance to those on the CSB who may have already done 
> this work - but i haven't yet seen a clear definition of the role of 
> the CSB in a way that is accessible to all. By that, i mean an 
> objective, and a list of tasks and activities it undertakes we all 
> agree is necessary.
>
> ** what does the CSB do that cannot be accomplished by the plenary, 
> the content and themes group or the caucuses and working groups **
>
> The *existing* CSB will meet on Monday Feb 14th from 0900-1200. It is 
> really important that these issues are discussed and clarified as soon 
> as possible for presentation in a clear and concise manner for the 
> Civil Society Orientation session later that same day at 1400. If not, 
> these issues will hamper our work throughout the prepcom.
>
> Civil Society Plenary and Content and themes group
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> working methods group
> ---------------------
> it seems some people are confused as to what that group is.
>
> Quite simply (and i am only a transient member of the group, which is 
> open to all) - it is a group that was formed to help evaluate, assess 
> and make proposals for any reorganising/adjusting etc - of the ways we 
> worked during Phase I - as outlined broadly in the document attached. 
> It was a direct response to the challenges CS experienced during phase 
> I with respect representation issues and concensus building (amongst 
> others).
>
> Sean O'Siochro made a proposal for reconstituting the Existing COntent 
> and Themes group - to the Content and themes workspace. But the 
> proposal has come largely from the discussions in the working methods 
> space.
>
> that proposal has tacit support from those who have responded in the 
> Content and themes space - but again, we need to table this proposal 
> more formally and work out some of the issues that still remain vague 
> - such as milton's comments:
>
> "If caucuses are to be represented on CSB, how does one form a caucus, 
> or are the current ones set in stone forever? And how does one abolish 
> a caucus that is no longer populated or functional?"
>
> A good time to address this would be - initially - during the CS 
> Caucuses meeting time of 1600-1900 on feb 14th.
>
> proposals and decisions
> -----------------------
> * Renate has posted an Agenda for the CSB meeting, and some general 
> recommendations for re-constituting the CSB. i would add my request 
> for a clear definition or the objectives, role, tasks and activities 
> of the CSB - before discussing representation etc.
>
> * Sean has posted a proposal for clarifying the ways in which caucuses 
> are consituted, role, drafting of documents, speaker identification 
> etc.
>
> * The working methods group has also made some proposals on the 
> mandate/objective of it's work.
>
> It would be incredibly useful if *one* document could be put together 
> including all of the above - (maybe even attaching the document i have 
> written by way of background if useful) and that it be
>
> - posted as soon as possible to plenary
> - translated into french and spanish
> - printed for delegates for the meeting next week
>
> If the above can't be done before the 14th (which is probably unlikely 
> now) as soon thereafter as possible.
>
> And i would then propose that decisions not be taken on the proposals 
> until later in the week when people have had access to the 
> documentation.
>
> apoligies, this has become a longer message than i intended!
>
> karen<CS_ways_of working_Phase_I.doc>