[WSIS CS-Plenary] Need of a CS structure to avoid future failures

Tue Mar 8 11:35:53 GMT 2005

Francis,
Excellent contribution which clarify the problems and
propose solutions.
I guess you must translate it in other languages you
master French and Spanish and post it to all caucusses
and Working groups to enlarge the debate.
I support your approach and like very much the
conclusion : "If there is no unanimous consensus, then
diverging opinions should be listed and publicized in
orderly fashion after" to credible the CS must be able
to demonstrate different positions when such a
situation exist.
Thanks for this effort and hope many comments.
Concerning an eventual participation of the Head of
state of Israel, my personal position is clear, there
is no problem for Isreal and his Head to participate
to the WSIS as long as there is no justification to
contest Tunis as inviting country. And it seems that
it is not a ggod idea for CS to start a dicussion on
this point, except if there is a concerted strategy to
boycott Tunis Summit.
I hope Renata will not found my message and Francis'
document too long, because of it will be difficult to
understand the whole.
We do must think about another softweare which support
long exchanges when necessary ! 
All the best

Merci à francis pour cet effort remarquable de travail
d'exposé des problèmes et de propositions de
solution.... J'espère que ce travail sera pris au
sérieux et qu'il suscitera des réactions et
commentaires et nous permettra d'aller de l'avant.
Heureux Francis qui a des clefs pour décoder les
méandres de qui est qui ? dans cette nébuleuse de la
SC, souhaitons à la SC lui plus de sérénité et
d'efficacité d'ici Tunis et au-delà et lorsque des
membres repèrent de brebis galeuses avec double
casquette Gouvernement-SC ou secteur privé-SC, qu'ils
les dénoncent et demandent leur exclusion de la SC.
Concernant la présence éventuelle du chef d'Etat
d'Israel à Tunis, ma position est qu'il n'y pas de
problème d'Israel cet Etat jusqu'à preuve du contraire
est un Etat membre de l'ONU et je ne vois pas de
raison de s'en préoccuper au même titre qe lorsqu'à
Genève en 2003, je soutenais la légitimité de Tunis
d'abriter le sommet, lorsque beaucoup promettaient un
boycott.
Djilali   

--- "Dr. Francis MUGUET" <muguet at mdpi.org> wrote:

> Hello everybody

> The recent exchange of mails on the plenary has
> shown that there is a serious problem within the
> Civil Society.
> It is time now to propose constructive solutions
> to cure the disease.
> 
> Whatever the culprits,
> the most important aspect is that
> those most regrettable situations :
> 1/ the CS press communiqué or
> 2/ the joint CS-CCBI declaration
> 3/ the possible expression on behalf
> of the CS by CS members of the WGIG
> 
> is simply the consequence of lack of structures
> and clear procedures to determine the expression
> of the whole CS.
> Without a defined structure, it is not possible
> to define procedures.
> 
> The "vox populi, vox dei" vote by
> applause by those lucky enough to assist at a
> specific Plenary
> or C&T (or evening plenary) meeting has shown
> its limitations.
> Tbe backroom deals in meetings whose location
> is disclosed to happy fews in hallways at the last
> moment,
> have shown also their limitations.
> 
> I suggested on the Plenary List
>   before PrepCom2 the formation of a
> CTB ( Content & Theme Bureau ) akin to the CSB.
> While the CSB deals with procedural issues and
> contact with gouvernements,
> the CTB deals with content issues,
> selects the drafting committee, defines
> the commoun official CS position, possibly
> arbitraging between divergent opinions of
> families and thematic groups,  whether it
> concerns documents to be sent to the executive
> secretariat to be communicated on the WSIS site,
> or concerning press releases.
> I sent this proposal also to the WGWM.
> 
> The CTB should be composed of the coordinators
> of the various families and thematic groups,
> including
> the very important HR group.
> CTB meetings like CSB meetings
>   should be open to all as observers, with a
> time slot for observers.
> 
> In Tunis, HR and censorships issues cannot be
> avoided,
> one must add the fact that Sharon is also coming at
> the WSIS,
> see http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=12734
> and therefore the political context is going to be
> extremely
> difficult to handle, and the risk that the CS could
> explode
> is real.
> 
> Therefore, more than ever, a structure is needed,
> with
> clear procedures.
> 
> Now concerning the specifics of each case.
> 
> 1/ CS press communiqué: I find personnally ludicrous
> the
> accusation of a manipulation by CONGO.  Rik should
> be
> commended to have step forward to indicate his
> responsability.
> My understanding is that Rik is a free-lance
> reporter hired 
> occasionnally by CONGO, and clearly Rik has
> overstepped his role
> in collecting various inputs in the CS to make a
> global
> CS press release.
> Since Rik was employed by CONGO, I understand that
> Jean-Louis
> cast a blame on CONGO.
> An agglomerate of the few inputs that managed
> to reach Rik in time does certainly not represent
> the political
> expression of the CS.  However, since there was no
> rules, no
> CS body to refer to,  this failure occured.
> 
> 2/ joint CS-Private Sector statement.
> 
> This matter is much more serious for the future that
> a press
> release that media are going to forget rather soon,
> and that
> other groups could contradict with their own press
> releases.
> 
> It is my understanding that this statement has been
> drafted by
> Bertrand and posted by him on 24 February to the
> Plenary list
> with a request for Comments.
> Only Wolfgand and Parminder voiced their agreement
> to the
> draft.
> Parminder from IT for Change, who is seemingly
> joining the
> WSIS at this PrepCom, finds the process perfectly
> correct,
> since the CS was consulted, and none objected,
> therefore
> there was a tacit agreement.
> However many other would differ, having no time
> to read all mails during the PrepCom storm,
>   and would think that such
> an important statement, a "première"
>   never done before in the WSIS would have deserved
> more consultations.
> I agree perfectly with those who
> want to dissociate themselves from this joint
> statement.
> This makes sense from a procedural standpoint.
> 
> However, we should be not against,
> for preconceived doctrinal reasons, a dialogue
> with the CCBI. I would like to point out that it is
> my
> personnal observation while lobbying with
> governments,
> that the CCBI is not that such an evil body,
> and that the evil monopolies are lobbying through
>   more hidden and devious channels directly
> within governement delegations.
> 
> However, extreme cautious is required when
> dealing with the CCBI. It is a very serious matter,
> that should not be dealt with lightly.
> 
> The consequences are rather important.
> 
> A/If after this "faux pas",
> the CCBI is still willing to interact with the CS,
> it is going to jeopardize the position of the
> CS in future negociations with the CCBI, possibly
> to jointly denounce non-inclusive practises and
> unfair monopolies.
> In short, we have lost a tactical advantage.
> 
> B/ those who have branded themselves as valid CS
> interlocutors
> to the CCBI may find themselves being discredited in
> front
> of the CCBI and the CS.
> 
> Again, if a CTB had existed,  a joint statement
> should
> have been the task of a joint CTB-CCBI meeting.
> 
> 3/ It must be clear the CS members of the WGIG are
> not
> authorized to express collectively on behalf on the
> whole
> CS on IG issues, even if the internal CS nomination
> process would have been devoid of the gross
> manipulation that
> I carefully exposed on this list.
> Yj  made a point that some issues have been
> overlooked.
> I believe that the CTB should have authority
> to determine the CS position on IG issues also.
> 
> Now, let us be clear, I am not recommanding to form
> a CTB as some sort of PolitBureau of the CS.
> If there is no unanimous consensus, then diverging
> opinions
> should be listed and publicized in orderly fashion
> after
> the majority opinion ( somewhat akin to the
> procedure followed by the US supreme court ).
> 
> It is just a draft proposition open to debate
> both within the plenary, all groups & families and
> the WGMN.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Francis
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------
> 
> -- 
>
-----------------------------------------------------------
>   Francis F. Muguet  Ph.D
> 
=== 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

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 