[WSIS CS-Plenary] CSTD session Tuesday 18 July

[Dr. Francis MUGUET]

Hello

This Tuesday session was most disappointing.
Its began with the surprising appearance of Achani who
came to communicate the delegates its "worry" of
seing so many paragraphs still in brackets, and the
slow progress of the negotiations.
We were then expecting Karklins to give CS the floor,
 as its happenned yesterday and as promised
( unless the promise was made only for one day ...  ;-( !  ),
but there was no such sign from the chair, and
so the  "intergovernemental" negotiation began.

Karklins went directly to the paragraphs on reporting
OP11bis, OP12 hoping to get an quick agreeement on those
seemingly easy ones.
Unfortunatly it was not case, as the G77/South African delegate
begun to ask questions to which Renate knew all the answers !
This person did not seem to be well informed as a career
diplomat should be ( alh the more he reminded Karklins later,
that he chaired an ECOSOC session once... )
Khan ( Global Alliance ) who happened to be on table row
with Karklins was even asked to provide explanations.
This bogged down the debate, while the two proposals
that  I was making concerning a direct report for the
sake of collecting information ( not for as sign of
being under the control of ) from specialized agencies,
and direct report contributions to CSTD by other stakeholders
were left aside.
Since CS was kept silent, despite some calm and
dignified handlings of the "Société Civile" official plastic signs,
 there was no way  to underline those two issues.


( This report is from the top of my head, as I am just
arriving in Paris, from Geneva,
  so the chronology might not be 100% accurate,
my remembrance is good only to some aspects,
while the rest got fuzzy )

Then we went to OP3 
again word smithing ( responsiblity, mechanisms )
and to OP4
The G77/ZA delegate went to discuss about his proposition
of having the word "monitor".
Canada, stauchnly opposed.
G77/ZA stood firm in a deadlock.
The EU proposed "examin"
Then G77/ZA proposed "oversee" but It was
claimed that "oversee" was the task of ECOSOC,
not of one its functional commission operating
at "a lower level'.
There was a deadlock,  and then the apex of the
grotesque was slow..ly reached.
The discussion degenerated. At loss, trying to help
( and possibly to show the vanity of this semantic discussion )
some delegates from South American countries began to
raise the question of how the verb "monitor" could be translated
in spanish, and could only be be translated as "control",
and quoting the Royal dictionnary, claim the verb
did not exist, but only the name. The delegate from Spain
( who never spoke ever since and probably never will speak ever again,
since in the EU ) said the Spanish language could vary from country to
country and the verb could exist...
The South American delegates did request the translators to intervene
in the discussion, but they were not allowed by the chair to give their 
opinions...
At that moment, Karklins, for once loosing his reserve,
 made an informal statement saying
that no matter what the exact terms be chosen, it would
not change anything in the way the bureaucracy would handle things.
Meanwhile I  handled a note to one of the secretary to be passed to
the chair asking when the CS statement was scheduled.  No answer.
Then we went mostly to OP4 c) and the hell was raised again
about the question if the list of stakeholders would appear there or
elsewhere, and  what should the list  should comprise.
In my written language proposal, I suggested that the digital solidarity 
fund should
be    at least  mentionned.
( nothing concerning financial ressources to bridge the digital divide
 is ever mentionned in this text so far... ) .

Then  G77/ZA asked what was the meaning of
"multistakeholders groups and platforms".  At that point,Karklins decided
to ask CS (Renate ) if no state objected ( none did ).
Renate was then allowed to provide some explanations that satisfied
seemingly G77/ZA.
Then at about 17H30, we went into OP10.
This time Karklins did again give CS the right to make some
observations. I was able to speak, quoting briefly, my written proposal
that CS should be given the same flexibility as the Private sector, in 
order
to allow CS entity, new to  the WSIS, but not  eligible to the ECOSOC 
status,
  to have the possiblity of being invited,
then  I proposed very briefly three addtional paragraphs one about
Think Tanks and another one about a much needed fund to help
CS people ( in particular from developing countries )
 to participate to ECOSOC sessions, and the last one
on the need of a multi-stakeholder advisory group to embody
the mutli-stakeholder approach.
In fact, I had ready a written proposal, a "CS non paper"
that describes the function of a _
Sub-Commission for multi-stakeholder approach_
This CS non paper was drafted by a helping hand in the staff of an
international organization that wish to remain anonymous.
Alhtough I had barely the time to read it, and just very sligthly
modified, I found the content  as an excellent rationnale for
a language proposal that I  elaborated by  using almost the
same language as for the WGIG creation.
( see attached rtf and openoffice format  ). 
CONGO (Philippe, Renate) read it also quickly, as well as
a DAPSI representative (can't remmeber his name,
he is a friend of Pape Diouf ).

--> Side remarks : Comments and improvements would be most helpful.
The content could be used also a stand alone CS non paper
that could be written by the CSB.
It is clear the CONGO must not present itself only with
its mandate with ECOSOC, but as the liaison officer of
the CSB, because otherwise we are stuck to ECOSOC
rules, while we want to get out of them.
If the situation does not improve tomorrow,
 the CSB shoud write a strong statement to Achani,
(  and/or  possibly to G77 )

Renate intervened again latter on, convincingly
on the necessity to have all CS included.
EU intervened to include mention of WSIS rules which is
a major advance.  I am no longer
sure but it seems to me that Australia and US also supported.
Anyway the US mentionned that the states were not bound,
for the reformed CSTD, to ECOSOC rules and were
 "sovereign" (exact words )  to adopt whatever rules they saw fit,
like WSIS rules.
Then the session ended.
Karklins announced the schedules of morning meetingS of regional
groups to prepare the next session on Wednesday afternnon
( it seems now that negotiation is going last, at least,
until Friday ) and somehow he mentionned observers,
and this was an occasion for the ZA/G77 delegate to launch
a pique, with his strong voice "G77  meetings have very  strict rules
on observers"   ( meaning there are none... :-( ! ).
Since I had to catch a train to go back to Paris, I had litle time
for late afternoon lobbying, except I came to see the US
delegate, somewhat surprised by their positive attitude today.
Concerning the _Sub-Commission for multi-stakeholder approach_,
he said that the US would not oppose it
( the argument of partially mirroring the MAG
in the IGF process seems to get traction ).
  I could not stay any longer in Geneva, I planned to stay until
last Friday and I extended until Tuesday night,
I some other urgent matters to deal with  in Paris, including
a contribution to the recourse before the constitutionnal council
against the bad and ugly Copyright law in France was very narrowly
adopted by the French parliament, but this is yer another story that
is going to be reported soon.

I hope more CS people could come, at least those in Geneva
that are accredited to ECOSOC.
I hope Jean-Louis in Strasbourg ( 4 hours ride ) from Geneva
could come as he said on his post to the plenary,
and could come under the banner of whatever CS entity
in ECOSOC consultative status
that could be kind enough to adopt his NGO on  a provisionnal basis
as an umbrella organization, to allow him to speak.

May be, we should seriously, investigate the possibility
of an umbrella organization with ECOSOC status.?

Let us  keep hope... but we need more actions than prayers,
altough we may need both...

All the best

Francis

PS. Sorry for typos, at this wee hour.


-- 

------------------------------------------------------ 
Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D 

MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
Associate Publisher
http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net

ENSTA   Paris, France
KNIS lab.  Director 
"Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS)
muguet at ensta.fr   http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet

World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
Civil Society Working Groups
Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair
Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web

UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org
WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org
------------------------------------------------------ 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MSHapproach-CSTD-Subsidiary-groupV2.rtf
Type: application/rtf
Size: 21912 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20060719/47c43f38/MSHapproach-CSTD-Subsidiary-groupV2.rtf
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MSHapproach-CSTD-Subsidiary-groupV2.sxw
Type: application/vnd.sun.xml.writer
Size: 10119 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20060719/47c43f38/MSHapproach-CSTD-Subsidiary-groupV2.sxw