[governance] protest statement drafted by Avri

Wed Sep 28 05:09:31 EDT 2005

I agree with reading the statement this morning. We have very little
time left.

I talked to the head of the Brazilian delegation, he insisted this is a
matter of procedure, and I was upset because there is always a margin
for flexibility in these procedures (proven in practice), and because he
 was among the first to raise the issue in prepcom 2 and now at prepcom 3.

To decide to be among the first to *explicitly* raise the issue puts
Brazil in the contradictory position of being against the presence of
non-governmental organizations in the discussions. The head of the
delegation sensed this was a blunder, because this is not the policy
Brazil practices nationally (contrary to all other countries which
insist on this exclusion because they do the same within their borders),
and, as Vittorio reports, later on decided to propose a more "tolerant"
procedure.

I asked him to drop from the Brazilian declarations any mention to
"pluralist" or "multistakeholder" to be consistent with his position, he
of course disagreed...

--c.a.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Carlos A. Afonso
diretor de planejamento
Rede de Informações para o Terceiro Setor - Rits
Rua Guilhermina Guinle, 272 - sexto andar
22270-060 Rio de Janeiro Brasil
tel +55-21-2527-5494
fax +55-21-2527-5460
http://www.rits.org.br
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wz-berlin.de>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 10:42:10 +0200
Subject: [governance] protest statement drafted by Avri

> Hi everyone,
> 
> Avri has redrafted our statement on exclusion of stakeholders from
> the 
> drafting groups. We weren't be able to discuss it in plenary this 
> morning due to lack of time. We would thus like to read this
> statement 
> this morning on behalf of the IG caucus. Any objections to that? I
> know, 
> you americans are still sleeping. Sorry...
> jeanette
> 
> Internet Governance Statement on the Decision to Exclude 
> Non-governmental stakeholders from Drafting Groups
> 
> September 27, 2005
> 
> 0. We want to thank the chair for your personal efforts to ensure 
> transparency and inclusion. We also want to thank the many nations
> that 
> have supported the non-governmental organizations in our quest to
> fully 
> participate in this Prepcom.  Now that it has become the practice of 
> some drafting groups to expel non-governmental participants, Civil 
> society is forced to protest
> 
> Civil Society believes all non-governmental partners should be able
> to 
> make statements on the same basis as agreed for the subcommittees, to
> remain in the room as observers for the entire session and to further
> contribute at the discretion of the chair of the drafting groups. 
> Such 
> procedures would put into practice the commitment to the full 
> participation of all stakeholders (e.g. Para 39.)
> 
> 1. The decisions to exclude non-governmental stakeholders from 
> meaningful participation in the drafting groups are not acceptable as
> a 
> matter of principle. The WSIS and the WGIG have affirmed that
> governance 
> of the Internet must be based on real partnerships with the 
> participation of all stakeholders in an open, inclusive and
> transparent 
> manner. These principles are central to the Geneva documents.
> 
>   The decisions made to exclude non-governmental stakeholders from 
> meaningful participation in the drafting groups breaks these
> fundamental 
> conditions and undermines the legitimacy of all outcomes of the WSIS.
> The sincerity of commitments made by some governments to these 
> principles is now open to question.
> 
> 2. The decisions to exclude non-governmental stakeholders from the 
> drafting groups are not about rules and procedure, but rather a
> matter 
> of political courage and principle. In each meeting you have the
> choice: 
> to be inclusive or exclusive, to work in partnership, with
> transparency 
> and openness, or to chose not to do so. There was a great opportunity
> here to move forward with all the progress we have made within the UN
> and WSIS, but this has been a move backwards.
> 
> 3. The Internet is the creation of the multi-stakeholder cooperation
> of 
> academia, civil society, governments, private sector and
> technologists. 
> There has never been a more successful multi-stakeholder partnership 
> than the one that has created and nurtured the Internet. Governments
> in 
> Geneva risk jeopardizing this partnership.
> 
> 4. The WGIG process demonstrated that civil society organizations 
> contribute positively. Our exclusion deprives the Prepcom of valuable
> knowledge, expertise and perspectives. Civil society has been, and
> will 
> continue to be, the main force for promoting capacity building and 
> development of the Internet in developing countries. Civil society 
> understands what is needed in order to continue that work, and
> exclusion 
> from the drafting groups makes it more difficult for us to continue
> that 
> work effectively.
> 
> 5. The WSIS Plan of Action cannot be implemented by governments
> alone: 
> the active engagement of civil society actors is needed in the
> follow-up 
> stage; our exclusion today would discourage many from engaging after 
> Tunis and would therefore reduce the chances of effectively
> implementing 
> the ambitious Plan of Action of Geneva.
> 
> 6. We strongly protest the decisions to exclude non-governmental 
> observers from the drafting groups. The Tunis declaration will be 
> meaningless if it is not seen as legitimate by all those involved in
> the 
> creation and evolution of the  Internet, its applications, services
> and 
> content.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance