[WSIS CS-Plenary] Proposed Guidelines for CS Plenary

[Yulia Timofeeva]

On 9/27/05, Vittorio Bertola <vb at bertola.eu.org> wrote:
>
>
> I understand the
> practical reasoning behind the idea of only allowing accredited
> organizations to be full participants in civil society, and denying
> individuals and non-accredited organizations the right to vote in the
> plenary. At the same time, I find it incredibly hard to accept.
>
> To me, this looks like a defeat. We could have tried to embrace
> something more innovative and forward-looking, rather than creating a sort
> of mockery of the governmental procedures, creating a second league of
> "onlookers" ... I would rather have conceived the Plenary as a free
> assembly of women and men, each equal to
> each other, and discussed separately how to certify the identity of each
> participant, and avoid capture.

   I strongly support this concern.

After all, civil society consists of people who care, who are active and
responsible, not of organizations. To give full membership to accredited CS
organization _only_ would totally undermine the whole idea of global
participation. Then the CSP should better be called NGOs Plenary or CSOs
Plenary – not Civil Society Plenary.

The deficiencies of any accreditation procedure is not a secret for anybody.
Why should those who care seek affiliation with the accredited entities that
perhaps do not even reflect their position? Why to deny the individuals the
right to act as independent members of the society? (actually it is not a
question but an opinion that this outcome is wrong)

Yulia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050927/44894df8/attachment.htm