SV: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Draft Statement for Sub-Committee B (for Tuesday afternoon)

Wed Sep 21 14:27:55 BST 2005

Dear all,

Could I add to bullet d: non-discrimination AND RECOGNITION OF MARGINALISED GROUPS?
Yours
Kicki 

Kicki Nordström 
World Blind Union 
Immediate Past  President 
c/o SRF Iris AB 
122 88 Enskede 
Sweden 
Tel: +46 (0)8 399 000 
Fax: +46 (0)8 725 99 20 
Cell: +46 (0)70 766 18 19 
E-mail: kino at iris,se 

________________________________

Från: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org] För Elizabeth Carll, PhD
Skickat: den 20 september 2005 17:46
Till: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Kopia: followup at wsis-cs.org
Ämne: RE: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Draft Statement for Sub-Committee B (for Tuesday afternoon)

Bertrand,

The various recommendations are excellent.  However, I would like to add one general point with regard to the first item below.  One of the major criticisms of the benchmarks and themes, plan of action of the (government) Geneva Declaration was that it did not go far enough and led to the writing of the CS Declaration.  The statement below appears to support the government Declaration.  While as a minimum this is important, it is also essential to include the benchmarks and thematic clusters from the CS Declaration, or why did we bother drafting it?  

One example which applies to the Health and ICT Working Group was the inclusion of the recognition of both physical and mental health information.  There were a number or other themes as well.  

It is critical not to overlook  the issues which gave rise to the drafting of the CS WSIS Declaration and work to include these and inclusively move forward on all previous CS issues.  

<<1)      Any framework must reaffirm the key principles of the Geneva Declaration and Plan of Action, including : 

a.       Sustainable development

b.      The respect of human rights and particularly freedom of expression 

c.       Women's empowerment and gender equality

d.      Non-discrimination>>

Thank you for your work on this.

Elizabeth

Dr.  Elizabeth  Carll
International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies;
UN NGO Committee on Mental  Health;
Communications Coordination Committee  for the UN
Tel:  631-754-2424
Fax: 631-754-5032
ecarll at optonline.net  

 -----Original Message-----
From: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org]On Behalf Of Bertrand de La Chapelle
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 10:24 PM
To: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Cc: followup at wsis-cs.org
Subject: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Draft Statement for Sub-Committee B (for Tuesday afternoon)

	Dear all,

	Following a first meeting of the Group on Sub-Committee B (aka Working Group on Implementation and Follow-up) monday evening, please find below the draft intervention for Tuesday afternoon session. This will be the first session of the committee and no agreement has so far been reached by governments on which text the discussion will start upon. 

	In this context, the choice has been made to focus the ipreliminary ntervention on a few basic principles and components, building on previous CS statements from the last two years. This will form the basis for more concrete formulations in the coming days, once we know the text that will form the basis for negociation. 

	Comments are welcome. but the final version will have to be finalized by lunchtime tuesday and the presentation should not last longer than three to four minutes (Nnenna will pronounce it). So please rather edit than add. 

	Thanks for taking the time to read this. The draft is sent to the Plenary for today, but successive interventions will be circulated on the newly opened followup mailing list (please subscribe at : http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/followup

	Best

	Bertrand

	Draft TEXT (word version attached)

	Statement on behalf of Civil society Working group on WSIS Implementation and Follow-up 

	Sub-Committee B - WSIS PrepCom3 - Sept 20, 2005

	In November, the Summit itself will be over. Geneva produced valuable Principles and a comprehensive Agenda for Action. Tunis must now produce a follow-up framework for getting things done. This framework must be both efficient and flexible. 

	It is not efficient to merely encourage actors to keep doing what they have always done. The present GFC draft is much too weak. We all need stronger commitments from governments and more structured mechanisms. 

	Flexibility is the second criteria : nobody wants a heavy architecture, cast in concrete for eternity, but rather an enabling framework. The proposals discussed at PreCom2 could generate a rigid, hierarchical and top-down   mechanism that could stifle initiatives and establish control under the guise of coordination. 

	In this first meting of Sub Committee B, and before a decision is made on which document or model discussions will be based upon, we want to outline some key components that any framework must contain to be efficient and flexible.

	The following key benchmarks will guide our drafting amendments in the coming days :

	1)      Any framework must reaffirm the key principles of the Geneva Declaration and Plan of Action, including : 

	a.       Sustainable development

	b.      The respect of human rights and particularly freedom of expression 

	c.       Women's empowerment and gender equality

	d.      Non-discrimination

	2)      Any framework should be based on a multi-stakeholder approach, and we strongly oppose the deletion of the terms "full and effective" to qualify CS participation in the most recent GFC draft; 

	3)      Any framework should address the national, regional and international levels but also articulate them; 

	4)      Regular Review Meetings must allow all actors to review progress in an open and multi-stakeholder format. This means more frequent and lighter meetings than usual +5 and +10 Summits. It also means more than the insertion of a few paragraphs in an annual report by the Secretary General to Ecosoc or the UN GA   Frequency and convenors of such Thematic, Regional and Global review meetings should be discussed;

	5)      Any framework should enable the progressive grouping of issues in larger Thematic Clusters , taking into account the Geneva Action Lines but without making them intangible;

	6)      Any framework should encourage the formation of Thematic Multi-stakeholder Initiatives , ideally with a minimum of common criteria for their formation and  functioning;

	7)      All international organizations, according to their mandate or geographical competence, should be instructed to integrate in their own activities the outcomes of the WSIS and to actively support and facilitate the Thematic Multi-stakeholder Initiatives that emerge; 

	8)      Governments should individually "pledge" to establish, at the national level, " multi-stakeholder implementation frameworks" to define e-strategies, facilitate concrete initiatives and provide open policy fora for debate;

	9)      A Global Policy Debate is needed. Paragraph 35 of the GFC document should not only be maintained but made even more precise. The possible articulation with the forum function envisaged in Internet Governance should be clarified. 

	10)  Finally, Resolution 57/270 B in no way prevents the WSIS to establish a specific and more efficient follow-up mechanism, as the 2003 report to the General Assembly on Resolution 57/270 has clearly established. 

	We will come back in more detail on each of these points in the coming days. We sincerely thank the Chair for establishing this flexible and efficient mechanism for interaction in this Sub-Committee. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050921/d0761bec/attachment.htm