[Lac] [Fwd: [governance] Minutes of WGIG consultations Part 5 - Chairman's summary comments]

[Beatriz Busaniche]

-----Mensaje reenviado-----
From: Bertrand de LA CHAPELLE <lachapelle at openwsis.org>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Minutes of WGIG consultations Part 5 - Chairman's summary comments
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:55:31 +0200

Chairman Nitin Desai Closing summary comments. (Formated 
text attached)

Bertrand de La Chapelle
wsis-online.net

_________________


Summary comments from Chairman Nitin Desai :

The present consultations were clearly not negociations, but 
an opportunity to exchange views.

The WGIG itself is not a negociating forum either. The 
decisions have to be taken within the WSIS process (in the 
prepComs and the Summit itself).

The purpose of the WGIG is to help the WSIS process work 
better. 

Internet Governance involves a set of institutions that 
already exist and they should be taken into account. 

Most of the contributions from governments were shaped by 
this dimension : this process should really help them.

Contributions from civil society, the internet community or 
the private sector have recognized the role of public 
policy. 

There is a convergence on some key ideas :

-	Internet Governance should be treated from a broad 
perspective,
-	Still some contributions recommended the group 
should focus on a limited set of issues,
-	The WGIG should take into account what is done 
elsewhere,
-	The WGIG should be based on a multistakeholder 
approach, including in its composition, and there was no 
objection to that,
-	The WGIG should be constituted in a form that is 
balanced (with a wide range of criteria for balance),
-	It must be a very open, inclusive and transparent 
process : we are not thinking of a classic group of experts, 
the way the UN usually does that sort of things,
-	Consultations of the sort held today should be 
repeated regularly, open to everybody, including by using 
electronic means,
-	As for the composition, there is a side recommending 
open-ended, others prefer a more limited group

The ultimate question is : “whose report is it that will 
come to us in July ?” : the report of all actors 
participating in the consultations or the report of the 
smaller drafting groups ?

Whatever the answer, the key point is nobody should feel 
excluded from this process. 

There were differences on which proportions are recommended 
for the balance between the different groups of 
stakeholders. It is not possible to take a decision right 
now; the key criteria to take into account is balance. 

If members “represent” the different constituencies and 
stakeholders, then it amounts to asking the SG to pick the 
representatives designated by the constituencies. The group 
should be felt as being “collectively representative”.

I believe the differences remaining are bridgeable. The 
United Nations came as facilitators, without any 
preconceived vision on how it should be done. 

We should continuing the presesent “dialogue of god faith”. 

All participants in this consultation process should 
envisage contributing resources, particularly financial, to 
facilitate this process. 

Bertrand de LA CHAPELLE
Director
wsis-online.net
lachapelle at openwsis.org
tel : 33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

About wsis-online.net
wsis-online.net is the community platform for all actors willing to implement the WSIS Action Plan. It offers a calendar of WSIS-related events, promotes people, organizations and projects and offers online consultations, all of them indexed along a list of Summit Themes. use it to promote your own activities at : www.wsis-online.net

________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance