[WSIS CS-Plenary] Report on WSIS P3 AM Plenary, 19 September

[Rik Panganiban]

WSIS Prepcom III, 19-30 September 2005, Geneva
First Plenary Session
19 September, 1000 – 1300 hours
Hall des Assemblees, Palais des Nations

Notes by Rik Panganiban. CONGO



Amb Karklins, President of the Prepcom, Opening remarks
He noted the paragraph in General Assembly Outcome Document referring to WSIS in the section on “science and technology” (A/60/L.1, para 60). He remarked that this is the last Prepcom.  There will be no Prepcom 3bis.  We have 60 working hours. The status of negotiations is reasonably good.   He listed what the delegates have to accomplish: political chapeau, Chapter 1 on implementation, Chapter 2 on financial mechanisms, Chapter 3 on Internet Governance – need to draft, negotiate and find compromise, and Chapter 4 on the Way Forward.

Adoption of Agenda
Adopted.


Organization of Work of Prepcom III
Charles Geiger clarified the speaking slots for observers.  Chairs of sub-cttees should give time to observers, about 45 minutes every six hours.  


Election of Chairpersons of sub-committees and rapporteur
Amb Masood Khan and Ms. Lyndall Shope-Mafole were elected as chairpersons of Sub-committees of Prepcom III. George Papadopous, Greece, was elected as rapporteur.


Accreditation of Observers
The list of recommended entities for accreditation to the WSIS was introduced.  A subsequent debate began on the question of the accreditation of the NGO Human Rights in China.

USA
Asked for clarification on why Human Rights in China was not accredited.

UK, on behalf of EU
We express concern about Human Rights in China on accreditation as well.

Charles Geiger, WSIS Executive Secretariat
He explained that the ES bound by document “arrangements for accreditation.”  We need to receive a list of contributions and sources, including government sources.  We have received a thick application from Human Rights in China.  Their list of donors includes anonymous donors.  Thus their file is not complete.

USA
Moved that Human Rights in China be accredited.

China
Asked how many entities that put forward applications were not included on the list?

Geiger
Note that they don’t have the full list.  In every prepcom there are usually several dozen NGOs that we could not recommend because their applications were not complete.  In Prepcom III, we had at least 50 NGOs who applied and whose files were not complete.

China
Let us not waste time on this.  We are only against those so-called NGOs with dubious governmental links.  Proposed that Prepcom III do not discuss those organizations which are not included on this list.

Canada
The document does not ask for “full disclosure” but only a “list of contributors” which they have provided.

Cuba
We are satisfied with ES explanation.  Let us not waste time on this.

Chair
We have an option of a vote.  This could take an hour.  I will lead informal consultations myself.  

China
We asked procedural question first about whether or not we should re-open the accreditation list.  Instead of informal negotiations, let us take a decision right now.

UK
We agree with chair to enter into informal discussions to save time.

China
This is the first time that a prepcom has considered an organization that is outside the list of accredited entities.  This is a precedent.

Chair
My understanding is that we are talking about one organization only.

China
Let me talk about this organization.  It has done nothing on the promotion of human rights in China.  It should be called “Human Rights in China in the United States.”  It refuses to disclose its contributors.
	We call for procedural vote on whether prepcom has authority to re-open list of accredited organizations.

Chair
We suspend the meeting for five minutes.


[Meeting was suspended at 1200 hours.  Meeting resumed at 1220 hours.]


Chair
The ES does a preliminary screening of applicants. In this instance, the ES recommendation was challenged by a number of delegations. The rules of procedure do not provide exact guidance.  
	China made a procedural motion that we would continue existing practice of not challenging the ES decision.  During consultations, I found that the best way forward would be to proceed with a vote.  A vote on China’s procedural motion would mean that if succeeded than we would consider agenda item on accreditation closed. If rejected, we would continue actions on agenda item under discussion.

The ES conducted a roll call vote on this issue.  

Chair
Among 194 countries accredited, 122 were present and voted.  52 in favor, 35 against, 35 abstain.  The motion was accepted.  The chapter on accreditation is closed.

The Plenary meeting will reconvene here at 3pm.

Here is a rough count of how the different delegations voted:

Delegation	Vote
Algeria	Abstain
Angola	Yes
Argentina	Astain
Australia	No
Austria	No
Bahrain	Abstain
Bangladesh	Yes
Barbados	Abstain
Belarus	Yes
Belgium	No
Benin	Yes
Bhutan	Yes
Bosnia & Herzogovina	No
Botswana	Yes
Brazil	Yes
Brunei Dar es Salaam	Yes
Bulgaria	No
Burkina Faso	Abstain
Burundi	Yes
Cambodia	Yes
Camaroon	Yes
Canada	No
Chad	Yes
Chile	Abstain
China	Yes
Columbia	Yes
Comor	Yes
Congo	Yes
Croatia	No
Cuba	Yes
Cyprus	Abstain
Czech Republic	No
Denmark	No
Djibouti	Abstain
Dominican Republic	Abstain
Ecuador	Abstain
Egypt	Yes
El Salvador	No
Equatorial Guinea	Yes
Eritrea	Yes
Estonia	No
Ethiopia	Yes
Finland	No
France	No
Gabon	Abstain
Germany	No
Ghana	Abstain
Greece	No
Guatemala	Abstain
Guinea	Yes
Honduras	Abstain
India	Yes
Indonesia	Yes
Iran	Yes
Iraq	Yes
Ireland	No
Italy	No
Jamaica	Abstain
Japan	Abstain
Jordan	Yes
Kenya	Yes
Latvia	No
Lebanon	Yes
Lesotho	Yes
Madagascar	Abstain
Malawi	Abstain
Malaysia	Abstain
Maldive 	Abstain
Mali	Abstain
Malta	No
Mauritania	Abstain
Mauritius	Abstain
Mexico	Yes
Morocco	Abstain
Mozambique	Abstain
Myanmar	Yes
Nepal	Yes
Netherlands	No
New Zealand	Abstain
Nicaragua	No
Niger	Yes
Nigeria	Yes
Norway	No
Oman	Yes
Pakistan	Yes
Panama	Abstain
Paraguay	Abstain
Peru	Abstain
Poland	No
Portugal	No
Qatar	Abstain
Rep of Korea	Abstain
Romania	No
Russian Fed	Yes
Saudi Arabia	Yes
Senegal	Abstain
Serbia Montenegro	No
Slovakia	No
Slovenia	No
Somalia	Yes
South Africa	Yes
Spain	No
Sri Lanka	Yes
Sudan	Yes
Sweden	No
Switzerland	No
Syria	Yes
Thailand	Yes
F Y R Macedonia	No
Togo	Abstain
Trinidad and Tobago	Abstain
Tunisia	Absent
Turkey	Abstain
Uganda	Yes
United Arab Emirates 	Yes
United Kingdom	No
Tanzania	Abstain
United States	No
Uruguay	Abstain
Venezuela	Yes
Yemen	Yes
Zambia	Yes
Zimbabwe	Yes

	

===============================================
RIK PANGANIBAN       Communications Coordinator

Conference of NGOs in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO) 
web: http://www.ngocongo.org
email: rik.panganiban at ngocongo.org
mobile: (+1) 917-710-5524