AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] What's going on ? "CS" Press release and
"CS"-Private sector joint statement
kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
Fri Mar 4 09:50:43 GMT 2005
Parminder is absolutly right.
This was my feeling during the whole process.
Von: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org im Auftrag von Parminder
Gesendet: Fr 04.03.2005 05:46
An: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Betreff: RE: [WSIS CS-Plenary] What's going on ? "CS" Press release and "CS"-Private sector joint statement
This is regarding the joint CS - business sector statement.
In the meeting between the civil society and business representatives
during the prepcom on 23/2, ìt was agreed that in terms of involvement
of non-government players in the WSIS process, and the later
implementation, civil society and business reps can work on joint
strategies. The specifics of the content of such a strategy in regard to
a call for open and inclusive approach to consultations and
implementation was also agreed.
The issue of a statement to be made by the CCBI (Coordination Committee
of Business Interlocutors) next day to the plenary also came up, and it
was found useful that the issue of multi-stakeholdership be endorsed
On 24/2 when the statement was prepared and to be read out by Ayesha of
CCBI, I was in the plenary and she checked with me if civil society had
any problems with the statement she carried and if we can endorse it. I
found the statement a perfectly good representation of the civil society
position, and said we will go with it. (I spoke from what was
articulated by civil society participants during the meeting on
24th.)And thus she read it on behalf of civil society and CCBI.
With all the differences we have with the business interests in WSIS
(and we as a part of a group on financing issues did articulate them
strongly in our advocacy), we need not take an attitude of
un-touchablilty with any legitimate group. I read this statement again,
and I find it perfectly agreeable. Does anyone have any issues with the
content of it? Or even about the process, to effect that under no
circumstance can there be a joint statement by CS and CCBI.
At occasions like the prepcom in order to be effective, often decisions
have to be taken quickly and pragmatically. To take an exclusionary and
'bureaucratic' attitude will dissuade purposeful activity on part of
civil society actors at such events. Of course all actions are open for
comments and criticism, but these must be constructive and with an
understanding of the contexts and situations.
Parminder Jeet Singh
IT for Change, Bangalore
Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
Ph: 91 80 2665 4134
Mobile: 91 98 4594 9445
From: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org] On
Behalf Of Meryem Marzouki
Sent: 03 March 2005 23:47
To: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Cc: hr-wsis at iris.sgdg.org
Subject: [WSIS CS-Plenary] What's going on ? "CS" Press release and
"CS"-Private sector joint statement
1/ I fully support the concerns on the "CS" press release raised by
Ralf hereafter, and previously by Jean-Louis and Rikke.
2/ I've found on ITU web site, in the list of documents submitted by
Observers, a document called "25 February 2005 - Observers (Business
Sector and Civil Society): Joint statement on behalf of Civil Society
Plenary and the Coordination Committee of Business Interlocutors"
There have been concerns raised on this plenary list by organizations
who asked for individual endorsements by organizations, rather than
attributing this statement to CS as a whole.
Who took the responsability to submit it to ITU secretariat to have it
on the website, thus ignoring the plenary ?
It is too late to withdraw the "CS" press release, since no one from CS
had the opportunity to comment on a draft.
But it is still time to ask for the so-called "Joint statement on
behalf of Civil Society Plenary and the Coordination Committee of
Business Interlocutors" to be removed from ITU website, and that its
promoters look for endorsements by individual organizations.
I'm really wondering what's going on with CS at WSIS II...
Meryem Marzouki - http://www.iris.sgdg.org
IRIS - Imaginons un réseau Internet solidaire
294 rue de Charenton - 75012 Paris
Le jeudi, 3 mars 2005, à 18:09 Europe/Paris, Ralf Bendrath a écrit :
> Dear all,
> I am also not happy about the press release, neither on the content
> nor on the procedural side.
> Renata Bloem schrieb:
>> This was not a statement of CONGO.
> But CONGO wrote it, refined it and sent it out, without any
> consultation with the plenary or whomever. Right? Given the fact that
> the final Content & Themes meeting where we collected points for Adina
> to include was on Friday evening, and the press release only was
> published on Wednesday, there would have been enough time to send out
> a first draft for further confirmation. That's how we did it before,
> like at PrepCom3a when I wrote the final CS press statement.
> > In fact we have not submitted a single sentence to it.
> But who wrote it then? The press release does not at all reflect the
> general discussion we had on the state of the process etc.
> "Despite some concerns about WSIS "losing its vision" and "moving
> from the Geneva Declaration track", civil society entities were
> generally satisfied with the response by governments to their efforts
> making the peoples' voices heard in "bridging the digital divide"."
> Here I fully agree with Jean-Louis: We (any especially the folks who
> worked hard on financing issues at the Prepcom) are certainly not
> "satisfied with the response by governments". Quite the opposite.
>> Adina was asked to make an amalgam of the submissions she had
>> received. and in order to avoid any misunderstanding / possible
>> conflicts she decided not to refer to any specific entity / group /
>> caucus, but to use more a general language
> That is fine, as long as the submissions are still somewhere
> BUT: I find no single sentence on Human Rights here, though the Human
> Rights Caucus had sumbitted language. Nothing on the lack of a Human
> Rights focus in the summit drafts, nothing on Tunisia as the host
> country, nothing on accreditation problems of NGOs like Human Rights
> in China. But then it mentions accreditation problems in WIPO. Why?
> And most of the press release is applauding the improvements in the
> multi-stakeholder process. But were there really any? We had our usual
> 15 minutes a day like we had two years ago. On the last day we did not
> even get these. The improvement is only on the substance side: They
> listen to us, because they either have no clue and need our input, or
> they have learned to take us serious. So, if we want to applaud
> anybody for the bigger impact we might have had during this PrepCom,
> it should be ourselves. BTW: Empirical research done on WSIS phase one
> suggests that CS impact is bigger in the early stages and gets smaller
> and smaller towards the end, when all that counts is the government's
> So, to me, this press release looks like somebody (if not CONGO, then
> who else?) wants to play extremely nice and by doing this is silencing
> all more outspoken and critical voices in civil society. Fine with me
> if some groups want to do this, but then they can't claim to speak for
> all civil society.
> I totally agree with Renata: We are lacking a clear press structure
> and really should work on it for PrepCom3.
> But while we don't have an agreed structure, things like these have to
> be done the most careful and inclusive way. And that normally includes
> a feedback loop on the plenary list, even more if there are a few days
> of time. Otherwise, we get a PR disaster like this and enlarge the
> divides between different groups of civil society in the WSIS.
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
Plenary mailing list
Plenary at wsis-cs.org
Plenary mailing list
Plenary at wsis-cs.org
More information about the Plenary