[governance] Re: Final score in CSTD consultations ??

[Ian Peter]

Have a break Izumi - and thanks so much for incredibly good reporting.

I agree - not a boycott at this stage. But those guys sure are showing
themselves to be troglodytes.

Ian Peter


> From: Izumi Aizu <aizu at anr.org>
> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Izumi Aizu <aizu at anr.org>
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 07:07:13 +0900
> To: Bertrand de LA CHAPELLE <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
> Cc: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: [governance] Re: Final score in CSTD consultations ??
> 
> Sorry for the delay. Now back at the hotel, munching some bread.
> 
> Well, as I put in the previous thread, Round III, they all reached the
> consensus of the text. Both sides kind of compromised for some words
> against other.
> 
> In essence, the non-governmental stakeholders were "invited" to the WG,
> but not as the fully fledged member, but as the guest, or as "second
> class citizen"
> which has been used many times during the negotiation.
> 
> The US, EU and other MSH friendly governments did not really insist on the
> pure equal footing of non-governmental actors in the WG.  There was a proposal
> from Iran, I guess to have only 2 from each sector, not 5. The Chair sort of
> insisted that they be 5 each, provided that the status of these non-gov actors
> are lower than the gov members.
> 
> So OECD governments, let's say became somewhat relived by seeing at least
> there be some members from CS, PS and tech and academia inside the WG,
> not with the full membership, nor the "observer" - can participate in the
> debate
> and deliberations, but not at the decision making. Well that's how
> most governments
> accept.
> 
> So then the focus of the debate went to the "rules of the procedures
> of ECOSOC and
> CSTD" - how much to impose these to non-gov actors.
> "in accordance with" was sort of first version, then Greece proposed:
> "bearing in mind"... at one time it was dropped, then came back, then
> Mexico questioned
> the secretariat if there is any CSTD rules of procedure. The answer was No,
> only
> functional commissions of the CSTD has rules of procedures, but not CSTD
> itself.
> So they dropped reference of CSTD and only left ECOSOC.
> 
> There are some details where the devils or the angels may reside but no one
> had the energy to visit the details - say how to select the civil
> society members,
> etc.
> 
> Of course, the outcome is far from satisfactory. Better than the Dec 6
> decision?
> I think yes.  Worth to pull the plug? I don't think so, at least at
> this stage, no.
> 
> Frankly, we did not have that much coherent move, yet. We do not have
> active work of strategy, outreach and work plan, yet. I mean it is not too
> late
> to work on these and define what exactly we like to gain, nor not to lose and
> then head to the next round.
> 
> Simply boycotting AT THIS STAGE doesn't give much gain, IMHO.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> izumi
> 
> (gimme a break).
> 
> 
> 2010/12/18 Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>:
>> Dear all,
>> Is anybody able to say what finally happened ?
>> Best
>> Bertrand
>> 
>> --
>> ____________________
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle
>> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>> 
>> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
>> Exupéry
>> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>                         >> Izumi Aizu <<
> 
>           Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
> 
>            Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
>                                   Japan
>                                  * * * * *
>            << Writing the Future of the History >>
>                                 www.anr.org
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t