[WSIS CS-Plenary] Plenary speakers in Tunis : why not focus on the themes ?

[Bertrand de La Chapelle]

Dear all,
 We knew this designation problem would happen and we are on the verge of
being trapped into it. We must at all costs avoid getting further into an
divisive discussion among ourselves, based on a sort of supreme right of
each caucus to have a speaking slot. This cannot happen and we know it.
 So, how can we move forward ? (I only address here the question of Plenary
Speakers - the question of the opening slot is a completely different
matter)
 There are three key elements/objectives to keep in mind :
- civil society should be recognized the right to designate who speaks on
behalf of civil society in Tunis : this means it should demonstrate it can
make such choices (otherwise, we'll be back to the Geneva situation and lose
a critical opportunity)
- civil society wants some key messages to be heard by governments and must
be clear about what they are (ie : we should structure and prioritize them)
- civil society wants to put in practice as much as possible gender,
geographic and competence balance in its representation
 If I am not mistaken, the process we put in place during PrepCom3 led to
the designation of 22 plenary speakers. But, even in the best case scenario,
according to the documents circulated at the begining of the process, there
will be a maximum of 14 or 15 civil society plenary speakers. And the
executive secretariat will necessarily want to put a few people of its own.
This means we need to shorten the list even further. So, at best, we will
get 10 slots in the end. If civil society wants to be able to claim it chose
its speakers and not leave it to the secretariat as last time, the best
solution would be to :
- ask for 10 slots we will allocate ourselves without interference from the
Secretariat (establishing CS right to designate people who will speak on its
behalf)
- choose ten key themes we want to put forward at the Summit (and define
them collectively)
- select (ideally within the present list of nominees established by the
selection Committte), a group of ten speakers able to carry these themes,
respecting gender and geographical balance
 What could be the main priority messages *for the Summit* ? I propose we
start with the following list of 10 themes and try to refine it further
(themes are in no particular order) :

   - *The Information Society is based on Freedom of Expression and
   Information* : the Internet is a key instrument/space for freedom of
   expression and information, and this should be protected and guaranteed (key
   Caucuses involved : Human Rights, Media, ...)
   - *The Information Society requires Universal Access* : participation
   in the Information Society is impossible if the infrastructure is not
   developped enough, including electricity, interconnexion costs, backbones
   and exchange points, telecentres (Key Caucuses : Telecentres, others ?)
   - *The Information Society must be inclusive and
development-oriented*: gender balance; special efforts towards
economically, geographically or
   socially marginalized groups, including indigenous communities; specific
   design architectures to facilitate use by people with disabilities; special
   needs of children and the elderly; promotion of multilingualism, including
   internationalized domain names (Key Caucuses : Gender, Indigenous, Persons
   with disabilities, Cultural diversity, ...)
   - *The Information Society depends upon Education and
   Capacity-Building* to be inclusive (Key Caucuses : Education and
   Academia, Scientific Information WG, ...)
   - *The Information Society requires new legal frameworks for
   Intellectual productions and creations* : see creative commons,
   free/open source software, open access (Key Caucuses : Patents and
   Trademarks WG, Scientific Information WG, ...)
   - *The Information Society should be based on trust more than
control*: cyber-security is not only about censorship and police but
also about
   creating trust, securing the infrastructure and protecting privacy, towards
   a true Digital Citizenship (Key Caucuses : Privacy and Security, Human
   Rights, ...)
   - *The Information Society is built at the grassroots level*, and not
   only by governments and international organizations : local actors and in
   particular local authorities have a key role to play (see Bilbao summit)
   (Key Caucuses : Local Authorities, Grassroots, Volunteers, Values and
   Ethics, ...)
   - *Internet is a Global Facility* : Internet Governance is the shared
   responsibility of all stakeholders and time has come to define the proper
   roles of all actors, including governments (Key Caucus : Internet
   Governance)
   - *A multi-stakeholder Follow-up framework is needed* to implement the
   the WSIS outcomes : governements cannot implement their commitments alone
   and this is the opportunity to establish a neww cooperation model at the
   international, regional and national levels (Key Working Group :
   Implementation and Follow-up WG)
   - *Africa* requires special efforts and innovative financing
   mechanisms (Key Caucuses : Financing, African Caucus, ...)

I believe these ten themes would allow all caucuses and interests within
civil society to find a space (but I may have forgotten some issues). They
could group together to draft the statements and try to come up collectively
with speakers who could best carry them, with a respect for gender and
geographic diversity. The existing NomCom could interact with the various
caucuses on that matter and propose a final list of 10 names to be endorsed
by the Plenary (hopefully by consensus).
  In chosing the fnal names, we must take into account that the messenger
personnality, eloquence, reputation or origin are important to make him/her
really listened to in such a forum (remember the impact of the presentation
by the Youth Caucus representative in Geneva ?). Given reactions on the
Plenary list, there will be strong resistance to the introduction of
speakers that were not directly involved in the process. Let's therefore
focus on names belonging to the various caucuses. This prevents us from
proposing high profile names that would attract attention; but it seems to
be a key condition for final endorsement by the CS Plenary. And there is not
much time left.
 *Proposed next steps*
 If the above approach is acceptable to all, we could, in the coming days :
 - notify the Executive Secretariat that we want 10 slots that we will fill
ourselves and set a final deadline for providing the names (I suppose there
are printing deadlines, for instance)
- review the proposed list of themes to see if there are key missing points
or if they could/should be formulated differently
- consult among the Key Caucuses and Working Groups concerned by each theme
on what the content of each intervention could be and who could best speak
on each theme (list of 2-3 speakers from the existing list of 22 ?)
- set up a small drafting group and a contact person for each of the 10
themes so that the preparation of the statements is done in advance in a
transparent and inclusive manner
- agree to give the responsibility to the Selection Committee to interact
with the various caucuses and working groups to come up - cooperatively - on
an acceptable and balanced list of 10 speakers
 I hope this can help us all move forward. CS needs to shape its message
first and then unite behind it.
 Best
 Bertrand
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20051005/86e5c6bb/attachment.htm