[CS Bureau] CS Plenary Draft Charter - respond by Sunday 25. Sept

[Ramin.Kaweh at unctad.org]

= URGENT =
PLEASE RESPOND BY Sunday 25 Sept !!

=======================================================================

Dear All,

Please see attached the latest DRAFT Civil Society Plenary Charter (CSP).
Note it is not the final recommendation of the WGWM, and your input and
suggestions, before sending it to the virtual as well as physical CS
Plenary, asap, by Monday.

THANKS to all those members who actively contributed during the past few
days, during the meetings and virtually !

Ramin & Rik

=======================================================================

version 23. September 2005

1. Mission

?The Mission of the Civil Society Plenary (CSP) is to bring all Civil
Society Organizations (CSOs) and individuals together for information
exchange and reporting; in special cases, an extraordinary CSP meeting can
be organized by a straw poll process for strategic, procedural and general
civil society related decision-making purposes.?

2. Objectives
?     to provide information exchange and reporting by the different CS
structures
?     to foster global civil society decision-making
?     to encourage a sense of a global civil society community for CS
actors participating at WSIS

3. Goals
?     to provide a space for dialogue and information exchange
?     to enhance the coordination and effectiveness of  CS structures in
the WSIS
?     to develop consensual positions on specific issues where possible

4. Terms of References

There are two main terms of references for the CSP. A) It is to provide a
space for information exchange, and B) as a decision-making body.

A)  Information Exchange Plenary Session
?     to organize regular CSP meetings, preferably at least once, every
morning during PrepCom meeting
?     to allocate the time for the different CS groupings/organs/working
groups to report back to the CSP

B) Decision-Making Plenary Session
?     The CSP is the most representative body of civil society
participating in the WSIS; as such, decisions of the Plenary take
precedence over other bodies.
?     The CSP is the ultimate CS organ to make decisions for all
[participating / attending?] CSOs.
?     The role of the CSB is to promote debate and greater transparency in
the organisation of civil society.
?     When convened, it is the ultimate civil society authority in the WSIS
process, in relation to the mandate and scope of the specific event.

5. Membership

?     It is open to all accredited civil society entities.
?     Other actors are welcomed to attend as observers, without the right
to vote.

6. Chairing

The CSP is chaired by two individuals with expertise in facilitation and
chairing, and knowledgeable about the WSIS processes and issues.

6.1 Roles:

?     to facilitate discussion and debate
?     to recognize the different speakers, respecting the diversity of
voices
?     the chairs cannot address content, and do not advocate positions, and
ought to remain neutral and unbiased

6.2 Selection of the Chairs:

Option 1)* open nomination process during CS Plenary (taking into account
regional, gender and linguistic balance).
Option 2) rotation among regional caucuses
      Option 3) rotation among CSB members

[* Recommendation: Option 1) The CSB would propose interim chairs to open
the nomination at the first plenary session, and two individuals would be
selected.]


7. Decision-Making Plenary Sessions

Decisions on internal CS organisational matters, or issues put forward by
the CSB or CTG, are referred to the CSP for adoption.

The CSP is chaired by two individuals with expertise in facilitation, the
ability to synthesize different positions, and knowledgeable about the
content and themes as well as the processes and issues of WSIS. The chairs
are supported by two secretaries of the CSB Secretariat.

7.1 Roles:
?     to facilitate, to consolidate and to synthesise the content of the
discussion/debate
?     to recognize all the different speakers, respecting the diversity of
voices
?     the chairs can address content, but cannot advocate any position, but
ought to be able to facilitate the different positions, bringing forward
solutions and compromises.

7.2 Selection of the Chairs:

      Option 1)* rotation among CSB members, subject to the approval of the
CSP
      Option 2) rotation among regional caucuses
Option 3) open nomination process during CS Plenary (taking into account
regional, gender and linguistic balance).

[*Recommendation: Option 1. The CSB should have a prepared list of possible
chairs, which would be presented to the CSP for approval at the
extra-ordinary session, when convened.]

7.3 Convocation:

?     An extra-ordinary decision-making session can be convened when
necessary by the CSP. In this case the CSB ought to meet immediately, in
order to assess the appropriate conditions of such an extra-ordinary
meeting and to make the necessary arrangements. The decision to convene
must be confirmed by the CSB.

?     The straw poll is to be used for determining whether or not there is
a need to hold an extra-ordinary decision-making session. A ?straw poll? is
a closed question (?yes? or ?no?) asked to the CSP, in order to get the
information by the people present in the Plenary by a show of hands, to
assess the general feeling regarding a specific question/issue.

?     An extra-ordinary decision-making session ought to be announced at
least 24 hours in advance, including the time and the space of the meeting
and in emergency/crises situations at least three hours in advance.

?     A reasonable time ought to be set and a deadline given for online
participants to express their opinions and positions and to contribute to
the debate.


7.4 Quorum:

?     The quorum must be checked and validated by the two Chairs as a first
point of order.

?     A quorum account of half of the accredited and registered number of
the CS entities present in the event; and confirmation of the quorum is
made on a non-objection basis.


7.5 Decision-Making and Voting:

?     The first aim is to reach a decision by consensus.

?     If no consensus can be reached, any member from the floor can ask for
the vote. The voting is based on two third (2/3) majority of the CS
entities present in the room. (There is one vote per accredited entity.)

?     If there is no clear two third (2/3) majority, there can be a 2. or
3. round of votes.

?     If there still no two third (2/3) majority after the 3. round, then a
simply majority (50%) is adopted as the final decision.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Draft - CS Plenary 230905.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 61440 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/bureau/attachments/20050923/a9c1a918/Draft-CSPlenary230905.doc