[WSIS CS-Plenary] RE: [Followup] negotiations in geneva

[CONGO - Philippe Dam]

Dear all,

Find below the summary of this afternoon’s meeting of the WSIS negotiation
group. It mainly focused on implementation and follow-up.

 

I will refer in the report below on the revised text of the operational
document (implementation and follow-up: WSIS-II/PC-3/DT-26
<http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt26rev1.doc>  (Rev. 1)) and to
the existing room documents, mostly available now on the ITU webite
(http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en
<http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=2178|2181|2182|2
183|2184|2185|2186|2187|2188|2189>
&id=2178|2181|2182|2183|2184|2185|2186|2187|2188|2189).

 

 

After consulting delegations, Karklins decided that the negotiation group
would keep DT-9 open together with DT-26 and continue to import elements
from DT-9.

 

Paragraph 11 d (Russia lead discussion group) – Education for girls and
women, room doct. 11

Russia presented its consensus text with general reference to training and
education. 

UK proposes new language: “promoting effective training and education,
particularly on ICT science and technology”. 

 

Brazil, supported by Canada, requested the element referring to decision
making should not be deleted from the later version, which was then rejected
by Russia.

 

Both proposals would be kept and brought for resumed PrepCom-3.

 

Paragraph 11 k (USA) – Libraries and free access

Proposed by the USA and amended by Australia, agreed as follows:

: “supporting educational, scientific, and cultural institutions, including
libraries, archives and museums, in their role of developing, providing
equitable, open and affordable access to, and preserving diverse and varied
content, including in digital form, to support informal and formal
education, and in particular supporting libraries in their public service
role of providing free and equitable access to information and improving
research and innovation and to improve ICT literacy and community
connectivity particularly in underserved communities;”

Agreed

 

Paragraph 11 L – Quality education

Ecuador proposed to add “dialect” in addition to language, before
withdrawing its proposed amendment.

Agreed

 

Paragraph 11 L2 – Quality of E-Content

“strengthening the creation of quality e-content, on national, regional and
international levels”

Israel would add “e-content, taking into consideration the ethical
dimensions of information society, on national
”, but not accepted by the
UK.

Chairman suspended the discussion, will be discussed in Tunis.

 

Paragraph 1 n (Norway - Iran) – Independence and Plurality and media

Norway reported that concerned delegations did not have the time to discuss
this issue properly. Proposed the non-consensual wording: ”Consistent with
the rule of law, we commit the development of domestic legislation that
guarantees the independence and plurality of media
”.

 

Chairman re-conducted drafting groups of Norway and Iran.

 

Paragraph 11 o (Egypt) – ICT and environment

Russia: proposes to introduce “the importance of the responsible use of
”.

Egypt: on the last new sentence of this paragraph on the specific needs of
developing countries.

Agreed

 

Paragraph 11 p (Iran and USA) – Co-regulation

This was almost agreed yesterday, except by Iran who withdrew its proposed
amendment today: we delete “co-regulatory” from DT-26.

Agreed

 

Paragraph 11 q (new proposal from Chile proposed yesterday) – creation of
research networks

Agreed

 

New paragraph 11 s (Argentina) - 

“by promoting the use of ICT to enhance flexible ways of working, including
teleworking, leading to greater productivity and job creation”.

Supported by GRULAC and G77. 

Egypt: proposes “flexible methods of working”

Chair: at this stage it is take-it-or-leave-it. Agreed as it stands.

Agreed

 

Paragraph 12 – Disaster reduction

Room Document 9 for new proposal on drafting group.

Pakistan: small amendment “a) promoting technical cooperation and enhancing
the capacity”.

Agreed

 

Paragraph 13 (new proposed text by EU, Indian, USA and Iran) – Child
helpline

Russia stressed importance of national legislation and economic elements and
proposed that this should be on the basis of existing legislations and in
accordance with existing rules and procedures. UK highlighted that the
wording proposed by Russia did not convey the right message, so that
Karklins kept the original para. 13 of DT-26, with UE proposal as alternate
and would carry it to Tunis.

 

Paragraph 15 (informal consultation on this paragraph by Chairman) –
unilateral measures

New text based on Karklins’ consultations did not get any consensus. The
Chairman suspended the discussion with the understanding that he would
continue to search for acceptable agreement.

 

Paragraph 17 (agreed ad referendum yesterday) – policy environment

No objection from Salvador, hence agreed

 

Paragraph 18 and 19 (Russia) – multi-stakeholder participation and
cooperation

Yesterday Russian proposed amendment to insert a reference to “the leading
role of governments” was rejected and there is no further agreement today,
unless Russian federation withdrew its amendment of yesterday. 

Russia leaves its proposed amendment in the text.

 

Paragraph 25 (proposal by Spain and consultation) – Information Society Day

Spain proposed to keep in bracket to the reference to the dates and leave
the rest of the paragraph as agreed. There is unanimity on the text but the
date must still be considered.

The text would be brought on this form to Tunis to make a deeper search on
the modalities and on who should do what.

 

Paragraphs 23 and so

Ambassador Karklins presented the informal answer he received from the UN in
New York: he was said the configuration of an interagency mechanism is a
prerogative of the system itself. A World Summit cannot tell CEB or SG to
create any body. The GA however can do that and can give general guidance,
such as set up in GA Resolution 57-270B, but cannot dictate elements. This
can only be decided by agreement among agencies, and only agencies can
decide which one should chair. The SG cannot decide to create or not a CEB
mechanism or not, but only propose, then it is up to agencies can agree or
not. Karklins stated he did not fully agree with this analysis, referring to
the WSIS Geneva Declaration 2003 which demanded the establishment of 2
working group, and the UN SG did it before the GA Resolution endorsing the
outcome of the Summit. In addition, Janis Karklins underlined the long
practice that UN Summit declaration are endorsed by the UNGA so that in his
view a World Summit can give guidance

 

On the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development: In its
present composition, the UN CSTD cannot provide a framework for follow-up or
intergovernmental political review. CSTD was mentioned as reconstructed
commission, which requires ECOSOC decision, which is certainly doable.

 

This morning, I circulated copies of the UN Handbook (I will scan it and
mail it to the CS Plenary list fyi over the week end). 

 

Paragraph 23

Canada is comfortable with this approach.

Russia was comfortable with §23 in isolation, but reserved the right to come
back to 23 later for better inter-linkages with other paragraphs.

 

Paragraph 24

2 proposals:      Iran (supported by G77): creation of UN Group on the
Information Society within the UN CEB.

                        UK 

 

Egypt proposed to replace the 1st sentence of DT-26 existing para 24 by the
DT9 §20b which reads as follows: “Each UN agency, within its mandate and
competencies, and based on decisions of their respective governing bodies,
and in line with UNGA Resolution 57/270 B, should facilitate activities
among different stakeholders, including civil society and the business
sector, to help national governments in their implementation efforts”

 

Chair reminded that the decision of governing bodies is already mentioned in
§23. 

Chile proposed to divide paragraph 24 in 3 parts: 1st sentence / CEB for
coordination modality / ECOSOC and its commission’s role (second part of the
UK proposal).

UK insisted to add “including on participation of multi-stakeholder”.

 

Chile proposed to change the UK - EU text so that the UN SG would report in
June 2006 and not in July 2006 (before ECOSOC substantive session). In
addition, this should be two separate paragraphs (he will submit a possible
reformulation in writing, to be available on the ITU early next week). 

 

Finally States agreed that the Egyptian/G77 proposal, with adequate changes
to avoid repetition with other paragraphs, would replace the previous
Iranian proposal, as follows: 

Proposal from Egypt for Para 24 (last part) of DT/26 (Rev. 1)

“In this regard, bearing in mind UNGA Resolution 57/270 B entitled
"Integrated and coordinated implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes
of the major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic and
social fields" and emphasizing the important responsibility of
intergovernmental bodies to further promote the implementation of the
outcomes of the major UN conferences and summits, we request the UN
Secretary-General to establish within the CEB a UN group on the Information
Society, chaired by the ITU, and consisting of the relevant UN organs and
organizations with the mandate to facilitate the implementation, evaluation
and the follow-up of WSIS and to report to the UNGA, on an annual basis [,
through the coordination segment of ECOSOC for further follow-up through the
functional UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development].”

 

Paragraph 26

Deleted because it was repeating elements of Egyptian and Iranian proposals.

 

Paragraph 27 and 29 (UK proposal to merge 27 and 29) – multi-stakeholder
participation

Honduras and Ghana supported that the Annex to Paragraph 27 should be
retained and remained open to new elements. Ghana proposed that

Egypt proposed to delete the mention of a “bottom-up” approach. Karklins
demands Egypt not to insist on this proposal, but later on accepted to leave
it in square brackets. 

 

Canada concluded that we should keep a non prescriptive approach of this
annex.

 

Political Chapeau, paragraph 32

Chair proposes to replace new propose 32 and 33 by Salvador proposal for 32.

UK refused and preferred to keep the former version.

 

 

Ambassador Karklins concluded that all what was still un-agreed at this
stage would be brought for further discussion in Tunis. 

 

The next governmental Bureau meeting on 1st November would decide on the
modalities for resumed PrepCom-3. Up-dated text under negotiation would be
issues at the beginning of next week. 

 

Best regards, 

 

Philippe Dam

 

Philippe Dam
CONGO - WSIS CS Secretariat 
11, Avenue de la Paix
CH-1202 Geneva
Tel: +41 22 301 1000
Fax: +41 22 301 2000
E-mail:  <mailto:wsis at ngocongo.org> wsis at ngocongo.org
Website:  <BLOCKED::http://www.ngocongo.org> www.ngocongo.org 

 

The Conference of NGOs (CONGO) is an international, membership association
that facilitates the participation of NGOs in United Nations debates and
decisions. Founded in 1948, CONGO's major objective is to ensure the
presence of NGOs in exchanges among the world's governments and United
Nations agencies on issues of global concern.  For more information see our
website at www.ngocongo.org <BLOCKED::http://www.ngocongo.org/> 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20051028/6e758032/attachment.htm