<div>Dear all, </div>
<div> </div>
<div>I had a phone conversation this evening with Amb. Karklins on the modalities of the October session and back to back Prepcom . The outcome is the following :</div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>October Meeting</strong> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>He mentionned that the October meeting is about negociation (that is : removing brackets) and not about adding new paragraphs. Only governments can do negociation. I mentionned that this is not yet true for the most important paragraphs of Chapter One and Four : the paragraphs still need to be drafted; we are not yet at the stage of removing brackets, as the exact nature of the follow-up famework was kept unaddressed until this very moment (which is by the way the reason for the October session). In addition, the very structure of the Chapter Four (with possible inclusion of parts of Chapter one) is still evolving and must be made more coherent to become readable by everybody. On both aspects therefore (possible follow-up architecture and document structure) CS actors have a lot of input to contribute and want ot help the PrepCom Chair and governements attain a good result for Tunis. I mentionned in particular the discussions by members of the Follow-up Group with several delegations during PrepCom3 that could help avoid a deadlock on follow-up.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Amb. Karklins agrees to verify with Security that accredited participants to the WSIS that will be able to come to Geneva in October will be allowed to enter the Palais des Nations during the 5 days. If needed, a precise list of who might attend could be transmitted in advance to facilitate access.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>More importantly, he also agreed to hold <strong>an interactive session with CS every morning for about 45 minutes</strong> (from 9:15 to 10:00) to get input. That is : the session would not only be about him reporting to CS but a real interactive session. The idea of a second similar evening session was raised, but schedule constraints would make it hard for him. The space is narrow, but if CS suggestions are focused and if this is combined with appropriate lobbying of governments in the corridors, this is a good practical way to give input and check how it is (or not) taken in. Of course, this does not establish a precedent at the symbolic level, only at the practical one, but we must take into account that the final phases of such processes are always edging towards closing doors rather than opening new ones.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>The PrepCom President also wants to make sure that reporting on the status of the discussions wil not be done only for people that can be present in Geneva. He envisages a daily report or even a conference call. It is obvious that CS reporting, including by CS members wearing governmental badges, will be very important for those who cannot come.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Important point :CS members with governmental badges (Jane, Vittorio, others ....?) should check whether they will be included in their national delegation for this special session</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Last point : Amb Karklins will work with the Executive Secretariat on the 13th and 14th of October to prepare the meeting of the 24-28 and will be away afterwards until the beggining of the session.. He <strong>is willing to meet briefly
</strong> (I guess one hour) with a limited group of members of the Follow-up Working Group<strong> in the afternoon of October 12th</strong> to get our input. I will make the trip as I have other things to do in Geneva and will push the ideas we have agreed upon during PrepCom3. Is anybody else from the Follow-up Group available in Geneva at that date ? (Chantal ?)
</div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>Back to Back Meeting before the Summit</strong></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Less information on that one. Just to say that it will be a PrepCom, with the normal rules of PrepComs; Amb. Karklins expects a lot of discussion to take place in Plenary in order to build political consensus, even if some drafting groups will naturally take place.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The Plenary room will be about 400 seats but there will be no specific space for Civil Society to hold daily plenaries as we did in Geneva (welcome corridors !). No precisions on the exact place of the venue (unles it was in the general announcement mail and I overlooked it).
</div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>Conclusion</strong></div>
<div> </div>
<div>At that stage, I found Amb. Karklins sincerely willing to explore practical modalities to take CS input in, in spite of the constraints of the rules of procedure. As a consequence, even knowing that the situation in October will not be perfect, the final evaluation of CS capacity to impact should probably be done only after the sesion :
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>- Either CS is somewhat satisfied with the result (ie the likely follow-up framework) and its actual capacity to interact with governments and there is no need to make strong protest statements</div>
<div>- Or, in spite of all efforts and goodwill from CS, real interaction was unsufficient and the result is not up to CS benchmarks and a statement will be appropriate.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>This, of course, is not completely a distinct question from whether CS should issue a parallel Decelaration.More on that in a separate mail. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Hope this information is useful.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Bertrand</div>
<div> </div></div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>