[WSIS CS-Plenary] On the selection committee process

[Jean-Louis FULLSACK]

Dear Lisa
I had the same feeling as you when I read Riks comments and the reasons he invoked to Meryem's exclusion from the list. In effect. Meryem was involved and always active in WSIS since its very beginning ! And this is well known by all CS activists. 
These kind of explanations are not honouring our "facilitators" nor do they give them our trust.
Jean-Louis Fullsack
CSDPTT




> Message du 14/10/05 17:03
> De : mclauglm at po.muohio.edu
> A : plenary at wsis-cs.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [WSIS CS-Plenary] On the selection committee process
> 
> [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people]
> 
> Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic translation of this message!
> _______________________________________
> 
> I'm not a member of the HR Caucus, for the 
> record; however, I find this explanation for why 
> Ms. Faidutti was chosen over Meryem Marzouki to 
> be rather questionable and groundless. Meryem is 
> quite capable of making her own case, but just to 
> offer a comment, I don't know how anyone could 
> dismiss her as not having a long involvement with 
> the WSIS process (unless I conjured up her 
> presence at prepcoms and on listservs during 
> phase 1) and a very broad expertise on human 
> rights. Given that WFUNA stands for World 
> Federation of United Nations Agencies, one would 
> assume that this organization has a long 
> involvement with the UN; judging from their web 
> site it is an involvement that prescribes support 
> for the UN and its processes regardless of the 
> lack of transparency and accountability that we 
> have all witnessed and should be addressed. I do 
> not know Ms. Faidutti, have never met her, and do 
> not intend this to be a criticism of her 
> specifically, and I hold no ill will toward her. 
> But, if you're going to offer an explanation as 
> to why she was chosen over Meryem, it seems as 
> though you're going to have to offer more by way 
> of explanation. Perhaps Ms. Faidutti represented 
> the "safer choice"?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Lisa
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >[Please note that by using 'REPLY', your 
> >response goes to the entire list. Kindly use 
> >individual addresses for responses intended for 
> >specific people]
> >
> >Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to 
> >access automatic translation of this message!
> >_______________________________________
> >
> >Hi Meryem,
> >
> >You're name was considered in the Committee's 
> >first meeting, alongside the HR Caucus's other 
> >nomination of Ms. Bruna Faidutti of WFUNA. It 
> >was decided to put forward the name of Ms. 
> >Faidutti, given WFUNA's long involvement in the 
> >WSIS process and the United Nations and her 
> >expertise on general human rights issues.
> >
> >Rik Panganiban
> >
> >On Oct 14, 2005, at 10:20 AM, Meryem Marzouki wrote:
> >
> >>[Please note that by using 'REPLY', your 
> >>response goes to the entire list. Kindly use 
> >>individual addresses for responses intended for 
> >>specific people]
> >>
> >>Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to 
> >>access automatic translation of this message!
> >>_______________________________________
> >>
> >>Dear Rik, dear selection committee, dear all,
> >>
> >>The Human Rights Caucus is still waiting for 
> >>the reasons why my own name, as HR caucus 
> >>co-chair, has not been retained. It has been 
> >>transmitted to you by Rikke, HR caucus 
> >>co-chair, on behalf of our caucus. This 
> >>proposal from the caucus has been reiterated on 
> >>its list, with the clear request to two members 
> >>of the selection committee to forward this 
> >>proposal to the committee.
> >>I know that I'm not very fashionable (although 
> >>I don't know if my hair are longer that Richard 
> >>Stallman's).
> >>Is there any other sound reason that the 
> >>selection committee could share with the 
> >>plenary, or at least with the caucus?
> >>
> >>This lack of transparency and accountability 
> >>from the selection committee is really 
> >>problematic. In addition to the fact that two 
> >>nominated Tunisian Senators are members of this 
> >>selection committee (2 out of 6 members, if I'm 
> >>not wrong).
> >>
> >>Finally, the process of collecting supports, 
> >>undertaken by the HR caucus, does not need any 
> >>support from the selection committee, since the 
> >>nomination proposal is addressed directly to 
> >>WSIS Secretary-General and to WSIS Preparatory 
> >>Process President.
> >>
> >>Best regards,
> >>Meryem Marzouki
> >>HR caucus co-chair
> >>
> >>Le vendredi, 14 oct 2005, à 15:36 Europe/Paris, Rik Panganiban a écrit :
> >>
> >>>Bertrand, et al,
> >>>
> >>>Of course any civil society group or caucus 
> >>>can communicate directly to the WSIS Executive 
> >>>Secretariat their recommendation for speakers 
> >>>for the WSIS. And the human rights caucus has 
> >>>done so.
> >>>
> >>>However we have still created a process 
> >>>through a selection committee composed of 
> >>>representatives chosen by the different 
> >>>regional groupings, the CS Bureau and Content 
> >>>and Themes. The committee is still 
> >>>deliberating on whether or not it can support 
> >>>the nomination.
> >>>
> >>>I would ask us to first go through our 
> >>>already-agreed process to try and get as much 
> >>>general support as possible. If this is not 
> >>>possible, than your other option and others 
> >>>should be considered.
> >>>
> >>>Respectfully,
> >>>
> >>>Rik Panganiban
> >>>chair of the selection committee
> >>>
> >>>On Oct 14, 2005, at 6:13 AM, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Having Ms. Shirin Ebadi as opening speaker for 
> >>>Civil Society in Tunis would present obvious 
> >>>advantages and her nomination could be 
> >>>forwarded to the Secretariat after a simple 
> >>>endorsement process described below.
> >>>
> >>>Main advantages
> >>>
> >>>1) It would of course put human rights and 
> >>>gender balance at the forefront of the 
> >>>building of inclusive information societies, 
> >>>uderlining that the WSIS process is not only 
> >>>about technology, and that appropriate 
> >>>"enabling environments" also mean freedom of 
> >>>expression and access to information, and 
> >>>"capacity building" also means equal 
> >>>opportunities for men and women, including 
> >>>access to education.
> >>>
> >>>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.
> >>>
> >>>If properly briefed on the status of 
> >>>discussions on the draft Tunis Declaration and 
> >>>the written commitments that governments plan 
> >>>to make in WSIS II, she would be in an ideal 
> >>>position to take governments at their own 
> >>>words and describe in plain language how far 
> >>>from these commitments actual practice in some 
> >>>countries really is. This is the opportunity 
> >>>to point the often too large gap between what 
> >>>governments say in international arenas and 
> >>>what they indeed practice at home.
> >>>
> >>>The WSIS has introduced something new in the 
> >>>international negociation process : witnesses. 
> >>>Civil Society's participation was not what it 
> >>>should have been; but enough organizations 
> >>>were nonetheless present during the process to 
> >>>hear government representatives make 
> >>>commitments they now can be held accountable 
> >>>for.
> >>>
> >>>Summits are not traditional bilateral 
> >>>negociations where secret is the natural rule. 
> >>>Summit processes are the closest thing to a 
> >>>world Parliament (far from it I know, but 
> >>>still the closest thing), where general 
> >>>principles for our global community (Polity) 
> >>>are elaborated. The first absolute rule of 
> >>>representative democracy is the publicity of 
> >>>debates.
> >>>
> >>>The ironic situation where citizens of 
> >>>countries (as CS actors) are not even allowed 
> >>>by the rules of procedure to simply listen to 
> >>>what representatives of their own government 
> >>>are saying on their behalf is totally 
> >>>contradictory with the notion of democracy and 
> >>>the transparency principle.
> >>>
> >>>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".
> >>>
> >>>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").
> >>>
> >>>Choosing Shirin Ebadi is therefore also a 
> >>>symbol of the inclusiveness of Civil Society.
> >>>
> >>>_______________
> >>>
> >>>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.
> >>>
> >>>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. :
> >>>- there is a need to take a decision (only one slot and a real deadline)
> >>>- absolute consensus cannot be achieved
> >>>- a large majority seems to emerge on a specific name
> >>>- dissenting opinions do not seem to be able 
> >>>to provide an alternative that would be 
> >>>accepted by all
> >>>
> >>>3) A two-fold process (taking inspiration from 
> >>>the notion of rough consensus) could therefore 
> >>>be established :
> >>>- a general call on the Plenary list would ask 
> >>>individuals or accredited entities to express 
> >>>support and a formal nomination paper would be 
> >>>transmitted to the Secretariat and Amb. 
> >>>Karklins with an attachment listing accredited 
> >>>entities and individuals supporting the 
> >>>nomination
> >>>- the call would simultaneously invite actors 
> >>>who might still have objections to the 
> >>>nomination (if any) to indicate so and allow 
> >>>them to submit a separate motion (sort of 
> >>>dissenting opinion) with : their name, all 
> >>>potential connexions with participating 
> >>>governments (as a matter of transparency) and 
> >>>- possibly - an alternative speaker they agree 
> >>>upon.
> >>>
> >>>The second element, that would allow the 
> >>>expression of minority positions, is essential 
> >>>to make the process fully legitimate.
> >>>
> >>>4) On a separate basis, CS actors with 
> >>>particular connexions with their governments 
> >>>could make them aware of the ongoing process 
> >>>and ask them to support publicly or more 
> >>>privately to the Secretariat the right of 
> >>>civil society to choose its opening speaker, 
> >>>outlining the bad press the Summit would get 
> >>>if the name of Shirin Ebadi were to be 
> >>>voluntarily refused.
> >>>
> >>>I hope this will help move forward on this good idea.
> >>>
> >>>Best
> >>>
> >>>Bertrand
> >>>
> >>>-
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 10/14/05, maseger at t-online.de wrote:
> >>>
> >>>[Please note that by using 'REPLY', your 
> >>>response goes to the entire list. Kindly use 
> >>>individual addresses for responses intended 
> >>>for specific people]
> >>>
> >>>Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to 
> >>>access automatic translation of this message!
> >>>_______________________________________
> >>>
> >>>Hallo, Meryem! & Friends!
> >>>
> >>>On behalf of my (European umbrella-)Organisation
> >>>I fully support the nomination of Mrs. Shirin Ebadi
> >>>(2003 peace Nobel prize winner) as a keynote speaker
> >>>for CS at the WSIS II Summit, TUNIS.
> >>>
> >>>And I thank Renata for her decision to step aside.
> >>>
> >>>MARIANNE
> >>>(Gender Caucus and European Caucus)
> >>>
> >>>Marianne Seger
> >>>permament European NGO observer
> >>>at the U.N. New York and Geneva
> >>>for
> >>>EURAG European Federation of Older Persons
> >>>GRAZ/AUSTRIA
> >>>( www.eurag-europe.org)
> >>>
> >>>---------------------------------------------------
> >>>> On behalf of the small organization which I
> >>>> represent, I wish to say that we most strongly
> >>>> support the nomination of Ms. Ebadi as a keynote
> >>>> speaker for CS at the Tunis Summit, especially
> >>>> under the circumstances and regardless of how
> >>>> much solidarity Adama Samassékou feels with CS
> >>>> (sorry Tracey--but we just don't believe that
> >>>> he's an appropriate CS representative).
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Lisa
> >>>> Union for Democratic Communications
> >>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>> >Dear Amir,
> >>>> >
> >>>> >This is to confirm that Ms. Ebadi has finally managed to make herself
> >>>> >available for the Tunis Summit, despite her busy agenda. We have got
> >>>> >the news very late, that is the reason why I posted only yesterday the
> >>>> >message and have sent yesterday also the letters to Mr Utsumi and to
> >>>> >Amb. Karklins.
> >>>> >The Human Rights caucus is in contact with her, through one of its
> >>>> >members. Her participation is entirely confirmed.
> >>>> >We would be happy to include the West-Asia Family in the list of CS
> >>>> >entities proposing Ms. Ebadi as a speaker for WSIS opening.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >Kind regards,
> >>>> >Meryem
> >>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Plenary mailing list
> >Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> >http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
> 
> 
> --
> Lisa McLaughlin, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor, Mass Communication & Women's Studies
> Editor, Feminist Media Studies
> Director of Graduate Studies, M.A. Program in Mass Communication
> Union for Democratic Communications Representative,
> World Summit on the Information Society
> 
> Mass Communication
> Williams Hall
> Miami University-Ohio
> Oxford, OH 45056
> USA
> Tele: 513-529-3547
> Fax: 513-529-1835
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20051014/c2534b32/attachment.htm