[WSIS CS-Plenary] Moving forward on Shirin Ebadi

[Robert Guerra]

On 14-Oct-05, at 6:13 AM, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:

>
> 2) She comes from a country that is very vocal during the WSIS  
> process and the last PrepCom in Internet Governance and Follow-up  
> discussions : in the first domain, the iranian national  
> representative strongly advocates that Internet Governance should  
> be "transparent and democratic,  with full linvolvement of all  
> stakeholders"; and in the second one, that follow-up at all levels  
> should be done with the participation of all stakeholders.
>
bertrand, doesn't Iran also mention that discussions be multiaternal  
and democratic - the code word for "only governments". I have, in the  
internet governance sub-committee and working groups where i've heard  
them speak never heard them specifically include "civil society".

if you have heard them specifically mention CS, please - let us know.

>
> 3) Finally, Shirin Ebadi was, if I understand well, the first woman  
> judge in Iran. In most countries, the judiciary is a branch of the  
> State and rightly so. Therefore, she is now a Civil Society actor  
> with a past in the governmental sector, as are today many ex- 
> ministers, presidents, parlementarians and civil servants. This  
> brings an interesting light to the discussion that recently emerged  
> around Adama or some "senators".
>
She also has received international recognition for her human rights  
work . Nobel prize, being one such prize. She's open about what she's  
done - practised disclosure. A good thing that should be done by all  
speakers being nominated too.

>
> Civil society is and should indeed be open to all individuals that,  
> irrespective of their past functions, engage in governance  
> processes as peers with all other actors, relinquishing whatever  
> privilege they may still have and accepting to be evaluated on  
> their sole "capacity to contribute", rather than the traditional  
> intergovernmental rule of "equal right to oppose" (which is,  
> ultimately, the basic foundation of the UN system under the  
> expression "equal sovereignty of States").
>
As long as people tell us what that have and/or are doing then fine.  
With fill disclosure people have the facts to know the full story,  
and then can make a decision.

>
> Choosing Shirin Ebadi is therefore also a symbol of the  
> inclusiveness of Civil Society.
>
indeed.

>
> Endorsement process
>
> Key question is now : if, as it seems from initial reactions, there  
> is a general agreement on her being the favorite CS choice for the  
> opening ceremony, how can this be secured ?
>
> 1) The principle that Civil society actors accredited to the Summit  
> process should - at least -  have the right to choose who is going  
> to speak on behalf of civil society for the opening ceremony must  
> be strongly reaffirmed; this is a "make or break" principle.
>
we seem to have consensus. I have not heard from anyone that opposes  
Ebadi. In fact, speakers that have been proposed for the opening were  
more than happy to cede their nomination over to Ebadi. That's an  
honourable thing to do

>
> 2) For obvious reasons, there is no way an absolute consensus can  
> be achieved on the Plenary list and we should not waste time trying  
> to obtain it. We are therefore in the typical situation where rough  
> consensus (as practiced in the internet community) is the only way  
> out.  :
>
Again , there seems to be a very high level of support and complete  
consensus. Not sure what more can do...
>
>