[WSIS CS-Plenary] Reservation on process - list of speakers for Tunis

Tue Oct 4 15:29:44 BST 2005

My greatest frustration is the lack of action that has taken place  
since the fact was known, months ago, that CS speakers had to be  
chosen by Oct. I, on numerous occasions have pointed out the fact.

I did not act, as with no funding - i thought the organization that  
has  received a significant pool of funding for assisting CS  
participation and involvement in WSIS would take proactive actions  
and/or consultations. that did not happen, and it was "left" to be  
done at the end of week one of the prepcom. That, clearly is a lack  
of leadership - a fact that has not been challenged.

I have stated my reservation and frustrations . As the deadline is  
looming, I would like to be productive. I will try, as best that I  
can - given the time we have - to not only review    already  
submitted names, but also propose possible speakers from the North  
American and European region which I represent on the bureau.

regards,

Robert

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

On 4-Oct-05, at 9:55 AM, Rik Panganiban wrote:

> Greetings Robert, Michael, et al,
>
> Just to clarify some issues that have been raised by several folks:
>
> 1.     Selection Process:  The selection process, including the  
> committee composed of 1 representative from each regional group,  
> one from the bureau and one from Content and Themes, was proposed  
> by me in my personal capacity, not on behalf of CONGO.  This was  
> accepted by the CS plenary as our agreed procedure for selecting  
> our speakers.  The alternative proposal -- going through each and  
> every nominee and voting on them -- seemed to me too painful,  
> awkward and time-consuming a process for everyone.
>
> 2.    "Multiple" Nominations:  As the selection committee reviewed  
> the nominees, and selected some for the "high level segment" we  
> realized that only one of our nominees would be selected. We  
> decided to not remove from consideration any one who we had  
> selected for the high level segment from other speaking slots that  
> they had been nominated for.  (That sounds more complicated than I  
> intended, sorry.)
>
> 3.     Caucuses versus Nominees / Issues:   The intention of the  
> committee was to choose people who would speak on a variety of  
> issues, not that each caucus would get  one person to speak in  
> Tunis.  A main consideration was the overall diversity of civil  
> society concerns being brought by the speakers chosen, which might  
> not equate to 1 person for each caucus.
>
> I again re-iterate what I stated earlier:
>
>> As I reported during the last Content and Themes meeting on  
>> Friday, the selection committee worked hard to try and balance the  
>> selected list of civil society Tunis speakers based on a number of  
>> considerations, including gender balance, regional balance, and  
>> thematic diversity, as well as being at a high-level in their  
>> organization, being a "high-profile" person, general competence,  
>> involvement in the WSIS, and speaking ability.  As I noted, we  
>> were not 100% satisfied with the nominations, particularly the  
>> lack of nominees from Latin America and the Carribean. But we felt  
>> all-in-all it was probably the best list we could provide in the  
>> time allotted and the restricted number of slots.
>>
>> I also noted that it was likely that the ITU was going to to  
>> continue to receive individual nominations from organizations over  
>> the next days, and to present to the Selection Committee a final  
>> list for our consideration and feedback probably by the end of  
>> this week.  At this point, the committee will see what can be done  
>> to make sure the final list of speakers in Tunis is the most  
>> representative speakers from civil society we can muster, within  
>> the requirements presented to us by the ITU.
>
> Unless someone can propose another selection process at this late-a- 
> date, let's allow the selection committee (which Robert Guerra is a  
> member of) a chance to review the proposed short list from the ITU,  
> and try and fill in gaps where we can.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Rik Panganiban
>
>
> On Oct 4, 2005, at 7:16 AM, Robert Guerra wrote:
>
>> On 4-Oct-05, at 6:14 AM, Gurstein, Michael wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'm also unclear as to rules, procedures and priorities/strategies
>>> here...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Michael:
>>
>> I will be more blunt.  Let me be more harsh. I know my comments  
>> will be controversial - but i need to express to this list what I  
>> expressed verbally several times during the recent prepcom in Geneva.
>>
>> It is my personal view that the Civil Society (CS) process for   
>> nomination of speakers names for the summit as developed at PC 3,  
>> is - well, a farce.
>>
>> The  developed a criteria, one that it left ngos less than a week  
>> to consult, one that only allowed those who had ONLY been already  
>> been involved and/or attended the wsis process to participate is  
>> unacceptable. Furthermore, the selection committee hastily created  
>> has - no - clue about who in fact would be a visionary, high level  
>> speaker (meaning only head of organizations need apply).
>>
>> At phase one CS was given well over a month to consult to its  
>> constituencies. However this time, this was not possible. This is  
>> not due to the ITU, which in fact DID notify the civil society  
>> bureau (CSB) through CONGO about the need to consult and submit  
>> names by the first week in Oct. Despite recieving generous funds  
>> (well over 150,000 CHF) to help co-ordinate CS @ wsis , CONGO for  
>> some reason dropped the ball and did not start the process well in  
>> advance. In fact, the issue was not raised until late in the first  
>> week of the prepcom.
>>
>> Leaving such a key and important issue almost until the end  
>> seriously compromises the ability of CS to find high level names  
>> to speak at  the very key summit events. For me this lack of  
>> leadership is , completely, unacceptable.
>>
>>
>> Three things to note :
>>
>> 1. NO funding of any kind is available for potential speakers to  
>> travel to, and attend the wsis summit (if they are selected)
>> 2. As was the case in the Geneva phase, it is the ITU that has the  
>> ultimate decision on the selection. Thus, the process has always  
>> allowed for  Individuals and/or organizations to contact and  
>> submit names to the ITU
>> 3. Again, as i mentioned earlier - the selection criteria and  
>> process as developed at the prepcom is not one I support. I have  
>> protested quite vocally against its process, specifically only  
>> favouring an elite few who have had the chance to attend an  
>> existing official WSIS prepcom event.
>>
>> Serious incidents have already arisen due to the lack of an open  
>> and clear process.   For example, on Friday hours before the 2nd  
>> plenary session the gender caucus had to deal with the issue of    
>> Saida "nomination" as an  an "excellent" personal to speak on  
>> behalf of the gender caucus at the summit. Magaly Pazello, the  
>> meeting chair refused. She reminded the attendees that  a process  
>> had to be followed first. After the meeting,  Saida and agents  
>> basically swarmed and intimidated Magaly outside the serpentine  
>> bar. Luckily the swarming was witnessed by several (non-tunisian)  
>> government delegates.
>>
>>
>> One has to ask the question,  will well known Tunisian agents be  
>> recommended as speakers at the summit ? If so, will we be OK with  
>> them speaking on the behalf of Civil Society ? Well, we have to  
>> deal with the issue...
>>
>> I have transmitted my concern and serious reservations about the  
>> last minute process that has been developed on this issue to the  
>> Canadian govt officials involved in the WSIS.
>>
>> In the meantime, i would  recommend the process be re-opened,  
>> allowing for suggestions of persons that might be good speakers to  
>> be further elaborated and developed in line with the comments sent  
>> by Michael Gurstein and others.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>
>> --
>> Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
>> Director, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR)
>> WSIS Civil Society Bureau, Focal Point for North America & Europe
>> Tel +1 416 893 0377 Fax +1 416 893 0374
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ===============================================
> RIK PANGANIBAN       Communications Coordinator
> Conference of NGOs in Consultative Relationship with the United  
> Nations (CONGO)
> web: http://www.ngocongo.org
> email: rik.panganiban at ngocongo.org
> mobile: (+1) 917-710-5524
>
> * Information on the WSIS at http://www.ngocongo.org/wsis
> * Information on Millennium+5 at http://www.ngocongo.org/mdg
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20051004/05977b3b/attachment.htm