<html>
Dear all,<br>
I also agree and support Sean´s five points as member of the CS plenary,
LAC caucus and CS Bureau.<br>
Olinca Marino<br><br>
<br>
At 01:57 p.m. 24/07/2003 +0100, Sean O Siochru wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Hi everyone <br><br>
I think John's surprising note, and the position he takes in it on civil
society structures, offers us an opportunity to remind ourselves of the
basic progress we have made so far in civil society. <b>This note is
seeking your support on five basic point below.</b> <br><br>
At 15:27 23/07/2003 -0400, <b>John R. Gagain Jr. wrote [my
bold]:<br><br>
</b><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><font face="arial" size=2 color="#0000FF"> Concerning
the modalities of the CS mechanisms at the WSIS:
<ol>
<li>CS Information Session and Debriefing. <b>There does not exist a
forum at the WSIS referred to as "Civil Society Plenary", nor
was there ever one </b>at any other U.N. sponsored Summit in the
past. A Plenary signifies a fixed group of members or member states
and the actual official definition is: <i>1. Complete in all respects,
unlimited or full: a diplomat with plenary powers, 2. Fully attended by
all qualified members: a plenary session of the council.</i> As you
can see, Civil Society does not fulfill this definition or its
prerequisites. ....
<li>[snip] ... , as I mention above,<b> there is no CS Plenary; and
especially not one that makes decisions on behalf of Civil Society.
</b>T</font></blockquote>
</ol>In one sense, it is refreshing to hear such definitive,
authoritative, statements about how Civil Society is organised at the
WSIS. (Why didn't someone tell us this two years ago?) <br><br>
More seriously, though, I cannot accept that the 'Civil Society Plenary'
meetings that I attended at Prepcom 1 at PrepCom 2, and that were held in
Paris, did not in fact take place as such, and that these meetings had no
authority to take decisions on behalf of civil society at the WSIS.
Such a claim, especially from a member of the Civil Society Bureau,
really must be refuted. As a member of the Bureau myself, this is
certainly not an official view and this is the first time I have heard it
aired. <br><br>
(By the same token, John could even define the Bureau out of existence on
the basis that one has never previously existed at Un conferences. Even
more, since in reality, the SOLE source of legitimacy for the Bureau is
the Civil Society Plenary, and since the Bureau itself has explicitly
agreed it is subject to the Civil Society Plenary, then surely the Bureau
cannot exist!) <br><br>
Nice and all as it is to fantasize, there are some important facts and
achievements of civil society in the WSIS process that I think are worth
reaffirming. <br><br>
1. Civil Society has constituted itself into a Plenary at every convening
of the WSIS, PrepComs, Intercessional, Summits. It is open to all of
civil society members and of course any organisations is free not to
participate. But the great majority have chosen to. It is the
ultimate decision making body of civil society in relation to the
WSIS. <br><br>
2. It has endorsed the existence of the Bureau, and the Bureau has
agreed explicitly that it is subject to the Civil Society Plenary Meeting
and must report to it regularly. <br><br>
3. The CS Plenary Meeting has endorsed the Content and Themes
Group, which also reports to it. And it has endorsed most if not
all of the various caucuses, working groups and so forth. <br><br>
4. The Civil Society Division of the Secretariat serves the Civil
Society Plenary Meeting and anything the Plenary sets up, although
it can also provide support to any groups who choose not to associate
with the Plenary. <br><br>
5. Regarding the (currently important) operation of the CS Plenary
between physical meetings, the following was agreed by the Civil Society
Plenary at PrepCom 2 (extract from the Description of the
plenary@wsis-cs.org list)
<a href="http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary" eudora="autourl">http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary</a>
<dl><i>
<dd>"The Civil Society Plenary Meeting, when convened, is the source
of legitimacy for all civil society activities in the WSIS.
<dd>Between PrepComs a 'Virtual CS Plenary Group' has been created
(plenary@wsis-cs.org), comprising organisations and other entities
accredited and registered at both PrepComs to date, from civil society,
although organisations with a key interest in the issues but that are not
part of the Summit process should also have the opportunity to
participate.
<dd>The list will <b>not be a decision-making space,</b> in the sense
that no voting will be called for, but a space to <b>promote greater
debate and transparency </b>in the organisation of Civil Society during
the summit." </i>[my bold]
</dl><br>
The CS-Plenary list (plenary@wsis-cs.org) was subsequently set up and now
has over 250 registered, all of whom in the interests of accountability
an transparency have registered their names when joining the list. Thus,
the CS-Plenary list is a space to promote debate and transparency in
civil society overall in between physically convened Civil Society
Plenary groups. I believe all major issues and proposals should be
openly debated there before any decisions are taken by other groups, such
as the Bureau and the Content & Themes Group. I also believe that
many decisions must be reaffirmed at the opening Civil Society Plenary at
PrepCom 3, if there have been widely different views expressed on it.
<br><br>
This structure may not be perfect, but it is all we have, it has wide
support, and has been endorsed at all major civil meetings and venues at
the WSIS. I really think at this point that we all have to be
working from the same basics. There are too many important issues
facing us right now to run the risk of destroying the structures we have
so painstakingly put together. <br><br>
<b>I am seeking support for the above five points </b>from those on this
list as I believe we cannot be continually reinventing the past and must
move forward. I will also be communicating on these matters within the
Bureau. <br><br>
Very best<br><br>
Sean <br><br>
<br>
___________________________________________________<br>
Seán Ó Siochrú<x-tab> </x-tab>Central office: tel: +353
1 473 0599 fax: +353 1 473 0597 <br>
NEXUS Research<x-tab> </x-tab>Mobile: +353 87 20 48 150<br>
14 Eaton Brae <x-tab> </x-tab>Direct office tel: +353 1 272
0739 fax: +353 1 272 0034 <br>
Shankill<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><br>
Co.
Dublin<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab>e-mail:
sean@nexus.ie<br>
Ireland<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab>Web
site:
<a href="http://www.iol.ie/nexus" eudora="autourl">http://www.iol.ie/nexus</a>
<br>
---<br>
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.<br>
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (<a href="http://www.grisoft.com/" eudora="autourl">http://www.grisoft.com</a>).<br>
Version: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/2003</blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=2><b><br><br>
<br><br>
<br>
LaNeta S.C.<br>
</b><a href="http://www.laneta.apc.org/" eudora="autourl">http://www.laneta.apc.org</a><br>
Información desde las organizaciones civiles en México.<br><br>
LaNeta S.C. es miembro de la Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones, APC<br>
<a href="http://www.apc.org/" eudora="autourl">http://www.apc.org</a><br>
</font></html>