[CS Bureau] non-transparent management and financing CS
participation
Dr. Francis MUGUET
muguet at wtis.org
Sun Oct 14 23:42:46 BST 2007
Att *Civil Society Bureau*
c/c WSIS-GOV group
c/c WSIS-finances group
/Dear English-speaking friends
There has been a recent intense mail exchange in French that
is important to be conveyed, across the linguistic divide.
The starting point is the original call from ACSIS translated below,
then there was some facts finding supporting this call, and then lastly
the address by Djilali to the CSB which has been sent to the CSB
list only in French
in chronological order, we have
//
* - Original call from ACSIS ( translated in English )*
- Detailed fact finding ( Francis )
- Louis Pouzin message of support of WSIS-GOV to ACSIS
//- *Djilali ( WSIS-Finance) call to the CSB
*// - // further information and suggestion ( Francis )
Most important messages are in *bold.
*
Best
Francis
//
----------------------------
////
/
> NANA Delphine wrote:
>> **Bonjour Cher Louis Pouzin et tous**
>> *** *
>> ** Le temps commence à se faire court. Je pense que nous
>> devons commencer à développer les stratégies pouvant nous permettre
>> d'explorer toutes les possibilités favorables pour atteindre RIO.**
>> *** *
>> ** Pour cela, je suggère que la WSIS-GOV contacte le CSB, afin que
>> ce dernier contacte à son tour le sécrétariat de l'IGF et l'IUT pour
>> la demande de financement des PVD sur les fonds mis à la disposition
>> par le Canada et le Japon**
>> *** *
>> **L'expérience du passé m'ammène à vous demander de bien vouloir
>> mettre un accent particulier sur la cas de la Société Civile
>> africaine, en ce qui concerne sa participation à Rio.**
>> *** *
>> **Best regards**
>> **
> Translation of original ACSIS message and answer in English
>
> /*Hello Louis Pouzin and everybody
>
> Time is running short, I think that we must start to develop
> strategies enabling us to explore all the favorable possibilities to
> reach RIO.
>
> For that, I suggest that the WSIS-GOV contacts the CSB ( Civil Society
> Bureau ), so that its contacts in turn
> the IGF secretariat and IUT to request financing for developing
> countries with
> the funds allocated by Canada and Japan
>
> Our past experience lead us to request to you to give a specific
> attention on the case of the African Civil Society,
> with regard to its participation in Rio.*
>
> /
/
// What is currently unfolding concerning Civil Society financing is of
a specific
concern to this group.
In short cf, infra for a detailed explanation), at least 100,000$ were
allocated exclusively
for experts of developing by Canada. In my opinion, there is much more
money available,
a part of the 89,000$ from Japan, and a part of the funds already
allocated with the IGF,
but the secretariat publishes neither the amounts (contrary to the WSIS
practices )
nor intentions of the donors.
No effort was made by the Secretariat to distribute those funds,
whereas the meeting of RIO will be held in a few weeks.
It is not necessary to qualify such a lack of leadership,
the facts are speaking for themselves.
It is suggested that the WSIS-Finance group joins
with the WSIS-GOV group (cf infra msg of Louis Pouzin) and
conveys to the Civil Society Bureau the urgent request from ACSIS (cf
infra),
which does nothing else than follow
the normal practice during the Geneva and Tunis phases.
Why in the follow-up phase,
the process should become "abnormal", non transparent and ineffective?
/
/Best regards
Francis/
> / /
> In my legal study ( http://www.wsis-gov.org/IGF/legal-igf.html ) it
> is noted that
>
> Concerning funding <http://www.intgovforum.org/funding.htm>of the
> secretariat, the names of the generous donors are disclosed but not
> the amount of the grants as it was the case for the ITU trust fund for
> the WSIS. An amount of 200,000 US$ is mentioned by Dr. Milton Mueller
> ( see reference V ) in those terms :/ //It's clear that if the results
> of WSIS did not signal overall acceptance of ICANN's legitimacy and
> current structure by the intergovernmental system, the initial results
> of the Forum's MAG selection do. One cannot avoid mentioning in this
> context the $200,000 contribution ICANN made to the Forum. That
> probably didn't hurt.
>
> /Currently the URL list is http://intgovforum.org/funding.htm
>
> /*Funding *:The Secretariat's activities are funded through
> extra-budgetary contributions paid into a multi-donor Trust Fund
> administered by the United Nations. Contributions from all
> stakeholders are welcome. *One objective of the fund is also to
> facilitate attendance of developing county participants.*
> /
>
> one must notice that is not the only objective, and *not even the main
> objective.*..!
>
> /The following donors have made contributions to the Trust Fund :/
>
> /- Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC
> <http://www.sdc.admin.ch/>)
> - Ministry of Economic Affairs of The Netherlands
> <http://www.minez.nl/content.jsp?objectid=21438>
> - Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway <http://www.dep.no/ud/engelsk/>
> - Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
> <http://www.dti.gov.uk/index.html>, United Kingdom.
> - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN
> <http://www.icann.org/>)
> - Number Resource Organization (NRO <http://www.nro.net/>)
> - Nominet UK <http://www.nominet.org.uk/>
> - The Swiss Education & Research Network (SWITCH <http://www.switch.ch/>)
> - The Internet Society (ISOC <http://www.isoc.org>)
> - Afilias <http://www.afilias.info/gateway/index_html> Global Registry
> Services
> - Nic.at <http://www.nic.at/> The Austrian Registry
> - UNINETT <http://www.norid.no/> Norid AS
> - Coordination Center for TLD RU <http://www.cctld.ru/>
> - auDA <http://www.auda.org.au/> Australia's Domain Name Administrator
> - Siemens <http://www.siemens.com/index.jsp> Aktiengesellschaft -
> Communications
> - NIKKEI DIGITAL CORE <http://nikkeidigitalcore.jp/>
> /
>
> /Pledges to the Trust Fund have been made by:
> - European Union (EU <http://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm>)
> Verizon Foundation <http://foundation.verizon.com/>/
>
> /In-kind contributions have been received by:
> - The United Nations Bureau in Geneva (UNOG <http://www.unog.ch/>)
> - Agence Intergouvernementale de la Francophonie- Institut Francophone
> des Nouvelles Technologies de l'Information et de la Formation (INTIF
> <http://intif.francophonie.org/>)
> /
>
>
> 23 may 2007 :
> /
> *Canada* is taking concrete action to try to make that happen. I am
> pleased to say that we have been able to place *$100,000* with the
> *ITU* to provide
> *fellowships to experts from developing countries* to participate in
> the Rio
> meeting. We firmly believe that our dialogue will be enhanced by the
> participation of developing country experts in the discussions in Rio.
> We also
> see this as a positive way of encouraging the ITU and the IGF to
> cooperate in a
> very real way.
> /
>
> in addition at the last consultation meeting on September 03
>
> /we are pleased to announce that
> *Japan *will enhance its support to the IGF and the Secretariat by
> contributing
> 10 million yen or about *$87,000 U.S. dollars *at a recent exchange
> rate for the
> future facilitation of preparation process of IGF, as well as capacity
> building, such as *fellowship programs for developing countries.*/*
> *
> There are several questions that are coming immediately to the mind :
> 1/ Why the amounts of money given is not disclosed by the IGF
> secretariat ?
> It is the first rule of *transparency.*
> During the WSIS, all the amounts given to ITU were proudly disclosed
> by ITU.
> Why the WSIS best practices are not longer followed, in what is still
> a WSIS process ?
>
> 2/ What the secretariat is doing is all this money ?.
> The salary of Desai is paid by the UN, the salary of Kumer,is taking
> care, indirectly by the Swiss government,
> so far I understood they do not pay rent
> There are at most of couple of interns, and the fees of consultants.
> The list of consultants is not disclosed, Only Avri Doria
> ( Chair of the ICANN GNSO ) has disclosed on
> the ICANN site that she is a IGF consultant. She is helping preparing
> the synthesis papers, so far it is known.
> Is it not an undue influence to have an ICANN official
> as a secretariat consultant ? The question is open ?.
>
> 3/ The secretariat claims it has no money to pay for translators.
> Has the IGF secretariat has to pay for conferences rooms at ITU
> or at Palais des Nations. ?
> If true, it would be fair that ITU should waive those renting fees.
> Concerning translators during consultations,
> the IGF may rely on much cheaper
> volunteers provided by ICV, as this was done occasionally during
> WSIS. The proposal of the "distributed multi-stakeholder"
> secretariat was welcome with silence....
> These are topics that must be revisited later in details.
>
> It is too late to make operational savings in time for RIO, so lets go
> back
> to funding schemes.
>
> Some stakeholders groupings obviously are not enthusiastic about
> those institutionalized funding schemes that could give political
> independence
> to CS speakers with limited financial capability, because theses
> groupings
> operates through the power of selecting cronies
> through financing.
>
> The now defunct dynamic coalition on IGF funding created in Athens
> turned
> to be a sad and indecent joke.
> The secretariat has not made any call for fellowships,
> The IGF secretariat is under-staffed to process such a call, anyway and
> It has not done so in Athens.
>
> So now, as advocated by the African Civil Society, represented by ACSIS
>
> ( by the way, it is a remarkable achievement that the whole African
> Civil Society
> is represented under one umbrella organization such as ACSIS, in no
> other
> region, such a feat has been accomplished )
>
> it is time to revert to the field-proven WSIS best practices.
> During the WSIS summits phases, ITU was transferring funds
> to the executive secretariat of the Civil Society Bureau that
> was then distributing financial support to CS members.
> Since phase II, the CSB executive secretariat is currently hold by CONGO
> ( http://ngocongo.org founded in 1948 )
> which has done this job with full accountability.
> In fact CONGO is better equipped in terms of staff,
> and accounting experience than the IGF secretariat
> to manage financial distribution, avoiding the
> conflict of interests between financing fellowships and the
> secretariat operations.
>
> It is interesting to underline that the *100,000$ *provided by Canada
> shall not
> be used for the secretariat expenses, but *only for fellowships*,
> and as well as a substantial part of the $87,000 provided by Japan.
>
> For the rest of the funding, and I guess the major part,
> the rule of silence prevails so far, and we do not know the intent of
> the donors.
> The WSIS-GOV group should contact the donors so that their amounts
> and their intent be publicly known.
>
> It seems logical that financial supports should be requested first
> for the WSIS-GOV speaker nominees ( whose list has just been proposed )
> coming from developing countries.
> As lower priority, financing could also be given,
> on a case by case basis, with full transparency, to the "poor in rich
> countries",
> ( often the best allies with the developing countries ).
>
> Indeed at least for the contribution of Canada in an escrow account at
> ITU,
> the CSB could interface directly at the operational level with the ITU,
> as done during WSIS,
> after agreement by the advisory group co-chairmen, since it
> is reasonable to expect that this kind of decision should be handled
> at a higher level than at the level of
> a supposedly purely clerical secretariat.
>
> Therefore the strategy advocated by ACSIS seems fully justified, and
> it seems the only way left for African Civil society to obtain
> independent funding at this stage.
>
> The floor is open for discussions and suggestions.
>
> Best regards
>
> Francis
>
>
>
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Gov 71] Stratégie à développer
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:55:17 +0200 (MEST)
From: Louis Pouzin <pouzin at well.com>
Reply-To: WSIS CS WG on Information Networks Governance <gov at wsis-gov.org>
To: NANA Delphine <delynana2002 at yahoo.fr>
CC: gov at wsis-gov.org
Chère Delphine,
*
La procédure que tu as proposée n'a soulevé aucune objection du groupe WSIS-GOV. Il y a donc un clair consensus pour la mettre en pratique. Je vais contacter le CSB pour la prise en compte de nos besoins de financement.
The procedure you have proposed did not raise any objection from the WSIS-GOV group. Hence, there is a clear consensus for its implementation. I shall contact the CSB for taking in account our funding needs.
*
Bien cordialement
Louis Pouzin
Président WSIS-GOV
- -
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 22:41:06 +0200 (CEST), NANA Delphine wrote:
> Le temps commence à se faire court. Je pense que nous devons commencer à développer les stratégies pouvant nous permettre d'explorer toutes les possibilités favorables pour atteindre RIO.
> Pour cela, je suggère que la WSIS-GOV contacte le CSB, afin que ce dernier contacte à son tour le sécrétariat de l'IGF et l'IUT pour la demande de financement des PVD sur les fonds mis à la disposition par le Canada et le Japon
> L'expérience du passé m'ammène à vous demander de bien vouloir mettre un accent particulier sur la cas de la Société Civile africaine, en ce qui concerne sa participation à Rio.
_______________________________________________
Gov mailing list
Gov at wsis-gov.org
http://mail.conferences.tv/mailman/listinfo/gov
/
Translated from French/
* Dijlali address to the CSB members
*
*No translation in English, English-speaking people that are
interested will have to make the same effort as French-speaking
people are enduring when they are reading their messages!
(/ NdT : I translated it anyway/ ;-) )
Dear colleagues and friends who survived to the WSIS process
I am making you a copy of a message sent on the wsis-finance list
that I coordinate, an alarm call about the unorthodox intrigues
and lack of transparency of the collectors and distributors of resources
intended to facilitate the participation of the African Civil Society
for Rio.
--------------------
Dear members of the wsis-finance Group
Many messages have just circulated to draw attention
to the opacity which surrounds the odd practices concerning
resources mobilization as well as the conditions of allowance
of those resources intended in whole or in part
for the financing of the participation to Rio
of African Civil Society representatives
Dear friends
In those messages, it is indicated that twenty or so
donors would have made contributions,
while the public is neither allowed
to know the true amount of those contributions,
nor the way in which these sums are allowable or have been already allocated,
nor to whom and according to which criteria ?
It is also learned that ACSIS,
supposed to promote the qualitative and quantitative participation
of the African civil Society representation,
has not been involved, neither distantly nor closely; with the
operation of an equitable distribution of collected sums.
One can only be astonished by the discretion which surrounds
this bad governance, on the IGF Secretariat level as well as the
Civil Society Bureau, in so far as this Bureau still has an
existence, a functionality and a legitimacy to accompany
the post WSIS process.
*
*I solemnly invite the members of the Civil Society Bureau*
*to react if they want to prove that the Civil Society is still alive,*
*and that Civil Society intends to play a role in the future.*
*What is occurring now, concerning Civil Society financing,*
*is of particular interest to us. *
*Our silence might be considered as complacency, even as*
*complicity with an IGF Secretariat which cannot be*
*distinguished neither for its transparency *
*nor for the effectiveness of certain acts that it poses. *
*With these facts, we witness a democracy and transparency deficit *
*and we might move significantly backward in comparison with*
* to meager progress which we obtained *
*at the time of the preparatory phases and *
*the WSIS Summit meetings in Geneva and Tunis. *
*
Friendly yours
Djilali
"""""""""
And to the effect that my message be more explicit,
I would like to refer to a previous
/( NdT from another thread elsewhere ) /
message from our friend Muguet and to support
his suggestion that the recipients of
collected resources should be only acknowledged stakeholders of
the WSIS, the follow-up and implementation process, that
cannot come to Rio, without this financial assistance.
It is necessary to exclude from this (recipient) list those
who benefit already from supports to participate, and all those
who, in any case, will be in Rio, with the
hope to carry out an advantageous financial transaction.
In any case, ACSIS should be associated, if not be the leader,
within the allocation process,
on a transparent basis and with verifiable criteria.
Djilali Benamrane:
*
Djilali Benamrane : dbenamrane at yahoo.com
Tel/fax : (227) 75 35 09 BP 11207 - Niamey - Niger
Tél/Fax : (331) 01 45 39 77 02 Paris - France
Page web sur le Sommet Mondial sur la Societe de l'Information (WSIS)
(mecanismes de financement) http://www.wsis-finance.org
et groupe de discussion : http://fr.groups.yahoo.com/
Page web sur l'Afrique et la globalisation : http://www.multimania.com/djilalibenamrane/
Groupe de discussion: http://www.egroups.com/list/afriqueglobalization
/--------------------------
//Translated from French
/Good evening
I fully associate myself with the emotion of Djilalali (representative
of the Group Finances at the Bureau),
and with the request of Delphine (representative of ACSIS and the
African Regional Family at this Bureau).
(for information, for those which are not familiar with the WSIS
structure, the URL of the Bureau
is http://csbureau.info, and the Bureau plays only one procedural part,
it is not a Polit Buro! )
As an exchange of messages is mentioned, it appears useful that it
should be quoted (see below)
for those which are not in the lists in c/c.
It is expected that the Education & Research Family
represented at the Bureau, in part by me, would support the request of
the African regional family.
In addition, I convey the message of a total support to ACSIS request,
on behalf of Louis Pouzin,
president of the new WSIS Working group, of the Civil Society,on
Information Governance (http://wsis-gov.org),
whose mailing list now exceeds hundred members, and where Delphine
launched the ACSIS first call.
The WSIS-GOV Group was established with an aim of clearly
differentiating the Civil Society
from the "Commintern" (the Community of the Internet) a
technico-industrial complex that
uses sophisticated techniques of lobbying, by using proxies, by
practicing the law of silence,
and by diverting shamelesslly the fondamuntal values of Civil Society
which are the transparency and inclusion.
They do not wish that the Internet Governance Forum should lead to any
other thing than wordy discussions
Of course, an inclusive participation, which would be more demanding in
terms of results,
and which might results on positions and recommendations is not their
priority....
CONGO, the executive secretariat of the Bureau, continues to play a
pivot part for information sharing,
and interface with the complex processes of the CSTD and the UN-GAID,
helping all civil Society, and not only thoses accredited to ECOSOC.
One can say that without CONGO, this complex process would have been
confiscated
by one or two large ONGs, very well financed, and allied with Commintern.
Answering to the poignant call of Djilali, it is time for the Bureau,
that suffered several attempts to be bogged down,
begins again fully and proudly its role of facilitator for an inclusive
participation of all, and specifically from LDCs,
and in particular of Africa.
In front of the amazing inefficiency and the non-transparency of the
secretariat of the FGI,
it would be appropriate that CONGO, as executive secretariat of the
Civil Society Bureau,
to
1/ request from the IGF Secretariat to provide the amount of the sums
available
to allow an inclusive participation of Civil Society, in particular that
from the develloping and transition countries
and if the IGF does not want, or cannot allocate them, then the Bureau
should take care of those funds,
2 for the funds given in trust fund with the ITU or elsewhere, to follow
the best practices of the WSIS, and
thus to provide to the ITU, the list of the Civil Society stakeholders
that should
benefit from financial supports in order to take part to the Forum of Rio.
It is proposed that the list of the potential recipients be drawn with the
the lists of the plenary speakers nominated,
on one hand by the Internet Governance Caucus,
and on the other hand by the WSIS Civil Society Working Group on
Information Networks Governance.
In priority nationals from LDCs and if the level of funding allows it;
nationals from countries of transition,
and then from industrialized countries.
Like Djilali mentioned it, this list of the potential recipiens should
include only stakeholders
who could not come to Rio, without this help,
The goal is not to allow some, already well financed , and which in any
case will come to Rio,
to make an advantageous financial transaction,
but to allow stakeholders who did not find yet any other financial
resource to be able to come.
It is kindly requested from CONGO to ask for the list of funds given in
trust to the IUT,
with the possible instructions of the donors, and to provide the IUT
with the list
potential recipients.
It is kindlu requested from CONGO to contact and ask the donors listed
on the IGF site to disclose
the amount of their donations and their instructions,
and to commence all appropriate procedures with transparent donors, as
expeditiously as possible.
Among the funds given in trust with the IUT, there are *100,000$ *from
Canada,
earmarked for the exclusive attention of experts from developing countries,
It is kindly requested from CONGO to contact in priority representatives
of Canada,
with a list of potential recepients coming from LDCs,
ASAP in order to facilitate fund transfer to recipients,
while it remains *only 4 weeks before Rio. *
It is also kindly requested from CONGO to contact, Japan, one
transparent donor which
made a public annoucement of its donation, and instructions.
As it is rather obvious that a suspicion of influence trough money
would still pervade upon the *non-transparent donors*.
In the very unlikely case of a non-transparent financial management and
complete disclosure
by the IGF the secretariat, it will be reluctantly forced upon us
to envisage that the Civil Society Bureau should require accounts
from the Secretary General of the United Nations, and possibly an audit.
But one can hope that Civil Society will not have to go up to this point.
It is undoubtedly, only a momentary insufficiency which has lasted for
two years.
In conclusion, it is very sad to get to this point,
but no one should yield to discouragement and despair,
because it is precisely the hidden agenda.
Friendly yours
Francis
/
-------------------------/
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/bureau/attachments/20071015/12f95e85/attachment.htm
More information about the Bureau
mailing list