[Working Methods] Re: [WSIS CS-Plenary] [CS Bureau] Re: Process for nominating CS speakers for summit [u]

[Robert Guerra [c]]

Great to see the discussion - has started.

Might I suggest there's agreement on what specific forum the initial  
discussions will take place. I mention this, as getting 2,3 or even 4  
copies of each and every message is a bit annoying.

As for a comment - there are two comments i'd like to make on the  
process:

1. Let's be aware of the fact that civil society interested and  
involved in the WSIS process are also found OUTSIDE the plenary  
lists. We should try to find methods and/or mechanisms so that those  
"outside" the insider's group know there's a nomination process  
underway and can contribute suggestions.

to address this point - i would recommend that whatever process and  
mechanism that gets developed be as open as possible. the call for  
nominations should be , for example , placed as a notice on the ITU/ 
WSIS newsletter as well as on the official WSIS page .  Thus, people  
would know that a  CS process is underway and how people can go to  
get more information.

2. Let's the define the roles, well in advance of what CS body will  
be involved and how. Might I proceed that a nomination committee be  
struck which would oversee the process. people involved would not  
necessarily have a say, but more make sure that the - logistics and  
openness - of the process go forward and be as fair as possible.


regards

Robert

--
Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
Managing Director, Privaterra <http://www.privaterra.org>




On 28-Jun-05, at 8:49 AM, Rik Panganiban wrote:

> Dear Friends,
>
> I am happy to see the Working Methods group re-started to address  
> this issue of speakers for the Summit and report back to plenary as  
> soon as possible.
>
> Rik Panganiban
> CONGO
>
> On Jun 28, 2005, at 6:01 AM, avri doria wrote:
>
>
>> I think it is.  We really have very little time to get back on  
>> track before the Prepcom.  It would be a pity if working methods  
>> did not have recommendations to make to the plenary on all of its  
>> tasks, including methods of choosing speakers.
>>
>> a.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050628/0a863bb6/attachment.htm