[WSIS CS-Plenary] "CS" Press release and CS-Private sector common statement

Sat Mar 5 22:33:31 GMT 2005

Dear Adam,
Perhaps that with this long debate things will be
clearer in the future and so we can start to bring
susbstantive contributions for the PREPCOM-3 and for
the Tunis Summit.
For me it is an excellent thing that the CS know this
crisis, it is a normal development of the process, we
are the image of the world society and you have seen
how the debate has been complcate beetween govenments
during the PRECOM-2.
Concerning Jean Louis position i am sorry to underline
that Jean Louis has been mandated to spaeck on behalf
of our Working Group and that we share his position
and analysis. But as democats we accept that you don't
share them.
you mentionned "We must stop this self-destructive
behavior and show more respect" Ok Adam let's define
basic rules of behavior but please don't propose that
the good governance in the CS is already defined and
we have the choose between the good and the bad sides.
Best regards
Quelques mots pour signifier à notre cher Adam que
jean Louis pest habilité pour parler au nom du Groupe
de travail où nous partageons les points de vue et nos
acceptons démocratiquement que d'autres ne partagent
pas les m^mes opinions.
Les discussion entre les représentations
gouvernementales ont été houleuses et n'ont pas abouti
à la fin du precom-2, aucune raison que la société
civile soit homogène et qu'emme ait honte de ces
débats sauf si elle veut devenir à un troupeau
d'agneau et ce débat est des plus utile pour faire
avancer un semblant de bonne gouvernance au sein de la
société civile et de grâce qu'on ne vienne pas nous
dire que la gouvernance est déjà définie et que nous
n'avons d'autres choix que de choisir entre le bien et
le mal.
Amitiés
Djilali 

.  
--- Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:

> I was hoping enough had been said about the 
> Internet governance caucus in Geneva, that the 
> allegations made towards the end of prepcom2 had 
> been shown to be exaggerated and unfair. Seems I 
> was wrong.
> 
> With apologies for this long note in English, but 
> too much has been said that needs to be corrected.
> 
> 
> >
> >I also remember the memorable interventions by 
> >J.Y. Park at the Wednesday 23 CS C&T meeting, 
> >about the CS contributions inside the WGIG and 
> >IG Causus lacking some basic CS concerns such as 
> >i.a. Human rights and gender issues.
> 
> 
> The statement produced by the Internet governance 
> caucus, read at the Content & Themes meeting on 
> Wednesday 23rd included contributions by the 
> gender caucus. To the best of my knowledge the 
> gender caucus supported the statement.
> 
> Members of the Human Rights caucus spent some 
> hours during the afternoon of the 23rd helping to 
> draft the statement. Perhaps people who were in 
> Geneva will remember we asked in Content & Themes 
> meeting and in CS Plenary for help in drafting? 
> It was an open call for people to participate.
> 
> To the best of my knowledge the human rights 
> caucus supported the statement. I know the human 
> rights caucus had concerns about the statement's 
> support for "multi-stakeholder" and their 
> acceptance of that language was very much 
> appreciated. In my opinion, the representatives 
> of that caucus are rather exceptional people.
> 
> 
> >She had to face rather hostile people especially 
> >members of the Internet gouvernance Caucus or of 
> >the WGIG itself.
> 
> 
> As I stated at the plenary meeting on Friday 24 and
> on the plenary list:
> 
> At 6:07 PM +0900 2/25/05, Adam Peake wrote:
> >
> >I made a very general statement in Plenary this 
> >morning saying that the Internet governance 
> >caucus is open (open list, open archives, open 
> >membership, open meetings.) We welcome all 
> >issues and have not, to the best of my 
> >knowledge, ever refused to listen to any 
> >person's opinion. We welcome contributions from 
> >anyone from civil society.
> >
> >I believe this to be true.
> >
> 
> 
> Please also see 
>
<http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/public/plenary/2005-February/004853.html>
> 
> and archives of the Internet governance caucus 
> <http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/public/plenary/> 
> (try 2005  February after the 23rd.)
> 
> 
> 
> >For me the outcome of this distorted mini-debate is
> still not clear,
> 
> 
> Then, with respect, please don't make unfounded
> allegations.
> 
> 
> >and an actual and open debate on this topic of 
> >paramount importance has to take place as soon 
> >as possible in the CS plenary, virtual or real, 
> >i.e. before July when the Report is due to be 
> >handed over to the SMSI Secretariat. I stress 
> >that we as CS don’t only need experts in 
> >Internet technical and management issues, but 
> >also people who are really aware of some most 
> >important cross-cutting themes and issues such 
> >as those mentioned above.
> 
> 
> There's a description below of the process we 
> followed in Geneva to develop a statement that we 
> hoped could be supported by the Content & Themes 
> meeting.  We made a point of trying to include 
> all caucuses in the discussion.
> 
> Jean-Louis, you were at these meetings, wasn't that
> obvious?
> 
> 
> >BTW, some of CS members involved in these IG 
> >working groups and lobbies are also 
> >professionals in this sector and therefore may 
> >have some personal interests ? This reminds me 
> >also the “CS-Private Sector joint statement” ….
> >So, please, beware of publishing “CS statements” 
> >of any format on Internet gouvernance (and other 
> >sensitive/important topics such as CS-PS common 
> >statements), without a clear and open debate 
> >inside the relevant caucuses and with an 
> >appropriate information given to the CS 
> >organisations and members.
> 
> 
> Again, see process description below, and again 
> note that the Internet governance caucus is open 
> to all.  Can you name a caucus that has done more 
> to be as or more inclusive?
> 
> I also object *very strongly* to the implication 
> that the caucus is in some way packed with 
> "professionals" who do not work for the interests 
> of civil society.
> 
> Name names, make your case. Or apologize, please.
> 
> Caucus members have worked extremely hard for the 
> past year to ensure that civil society interests 
> are well represented in Internet governance 
> discussions. We have helped the WGIG become as 
> open and transparent a process as I think anyone 
> could have hoped for. The WGIG has almost half 
> its members from civil society related 
> organizations. Anyone participating in 
> discussions around WGIG will see the very 
> positive impact civil society is having and the 
> high degree of respect given to our contributions.
> 
> We are well aware that people on our list and 
> active in caucus discussions have different roles 
> (this was a subject discussed during two of our 
> open caucus meetings in Geneva.) We know what 
> conflicts of interest exist, people are open 
> about this, and we respect their opinions and are 
> well aware of who wears what "hat".
> 
> Jean Louis, rumor mongering and spreading stories 
> does more harm to civil society than any press 
> release or statement with the private sector ever 
> could.
> 
> We must stop this self-destructive behavior and show
> more respect.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >Best
> >Jean-Louis Fullsack
> >CSDPTT
> 
> 
> 
> Geneva, PrepCom2: attempting to coordinate a
> statement on Internet governance.
> 
> On Monday Feb 21 the Internet Governance caucus 
> came to the evening Content & Themes meeting and 
> proposed to work with any/all caucuses on 
> coordinated statements about Internet governance. 
> We knew governments would be discussing the draft 
> WGIG report on Feb 24. We knew we would have 
> about 15 minutes in which to make statements. It 
> seemed sensible to coordinate how best to use 
> those 15 minutes.
> 
> There was general agreement to such a coordinated 
> approach from Content & Themes and a number of 
> caucuses indicated an interest in making a 
> statements on Internet governance. We promised to 
> prepare a statement for consideration by the 
> Content & Themes meeting of Feb 23rd.  Content & 
> Themes reserved the right to reject any statement 
> produced if it did not meet with the approval of 
> the meeting.  Internet governance caucus accepted 
> this.
> 
> Internet governance caucus took contributions 
> over the course of the following day (Feb 22). On 
> the morning of Feb 23 the Internet governance 
> caucus held an open meeting to discuss the 
> overall statement and key issues.  All this was 
> mentioned in Content & Themes and I believe also 
> announced in the morning plenary meeting. There 
> were no objections, only support for what we were 
> 
=== message truncated ===

Djilali Benamrane : dbenamrane at yahoo.com
Tel/fax : (227) 75 35 09 BP 11207 - Niamey - Niger
Tél/Fax : (331) 01 45 39 77 02 Paris - France
Page web sur le SMSI (mecanismes de financement) : en cours de construction 
Page web sur l'Afrique et la globalisation : http://www.multimania.com/djilalibenamrane/
Groupe de discussion: http://www.egroups.com/list/afriqueglobalization

__________________________________ 
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! 
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web 
http://birthday.yahoo.com/netrospective/