<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Verdana">Hi </font><font face="Verdana">Wolfgang,<br>
<br>
Losing even what we had in the form of the WSIS format is a huge
huge loss, and it saddens me a lot. It is such a set back for
participatory democracy at the global level. Yes, we must write a
letter about it.<br>
<br>
But, wait a minute. Let us for a moment also look at the IG civil
society's role in getting us to this unfortunate pass.... Did we
ever ask for the WSIS model (of course with evolutionary
improvements) for WSIS plus 10 review. No, no one did. What was
being asked for instead is as follows:<br>
<br>
1. Dont do WSIS review, just forget it. Multistakeholderism (MS
ism) has caught on, and NetMundial kind of MS events are the best
way to move forward.<br>
<br>
2. Ok, if you just must do something of a review, merge it with
SDG (Sustainable Dev Goals) review, which really is another way to
make the most important global IG issues disappear.<br>
<br>
3. Next, do the review at as low a level as possible... Let the
bureaucracy (and not political) level UN processes like those led
by UNESCO and ITU stand as 'the' review.<br>
<br>
4. Now, if you indeed must do a full WSIS plus 10 review, have it
on an 'equal footing' MS pattern, so everyone participates as
equal in decision making processes throughout...<br>
<br>
<br>
Further, at UN processes which did attempt some real
multistakeholder participation like the WG on Enhanced
Cooperation, all kinds of highly obstructionist methods and
attitudes were displayed by many if not most non gov actors which
really did not allow things to go anywhere. Because of which
reason the WG work collapsed and it folded up without giving any
recommendations, as it was supposed to do. The internal working of
the WG, to which I was witness, was a real testimony to how highly
resourced non gov actors can network, in fact gang up, so
effectively to stop any useful policy process. <br>
<br>
Do you think the above kinds of things contribute to giving
confidence to governments that greater stakaeholder participation,
under the conditions in which IG MSism works, is useful in taking
forward the important agenda of providing the (very) necessary and
urgent global political responses to the myriad challenges and
opportunities that the Internet is throwing/ opening up. I very
much doubt it. So as we write a letter, lets also examine our own
role in all this. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Monday 04 August 2014 02:16 PM,
"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642514@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.outlookindia.com/news/article/UN-Adopts-Resolution-on-Bridging-Digital-Divide/852511">http://www.outlookindia.com/news/article/UN-Adopts-Resolution-on-Bridging-Digital-Divide/852511</a>
Outlook India:
The resolution decided that the overall review will be concluded in December 2015 by a two-day General Assembly high-level meeting to be preceded by an inter-governmental preparatory process that also takes into account inputs from all relevant stakeholders of WSIS. The intergovernmental negotiation process would begin in June 2015 and lead to an inter-governmentally agreed outcome document for adoption at the UNGA meeting. The process retains the ownership of the preparatory meetings and the final outcome document with member states alone. Mukerji said the resolution ensures that leaders, "at the highest possible level" will meet at the high-level plenary meeting in December next year to adopt the outcome of the intergovernmental negotiations.
Wolfgang:
One of the big achievements in the WSIS process was that civil society got a voice in the process. A Milestone was the CS WSIS Declaratzion from December 2003 which was handed over to the president of the first summit, WSIS 1. It became an official document. The Tunis Agenda confirmed and enhanced the role of civil society. As you can see from the text above, ten years later this process is back in the hands of "governments only". The final outcome document will be with member states only by taking into account inputs from all relevant stakeholders (which sounds like a joke with the experiences of a enhanced communicartion and cooperation over the last ten years, including the UNCSTD WGs. Should civil society write a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Kin Moon?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>