[governance] Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing CSTD

Tue Feb 16 08:17:05 EST 2010

I second Deirdre (I would also remove "very complicated" in the same para).

Also, I would try to briefly stress how the pluralist approach resulted
in quite successful national and regional IGFs, bringing valuable
contributions to the debates and dialogues in the main IGF.

A hint on what we would do if Moon does not react and things follow this
absurd path is missing, I think. We respectfully request and do not dare
to mention what would a next step be on our part if we are just kicked
in the butt by the Secre (which is a real possibility)?

fraternal regards

--c.a.

Deirdre Williams wrote:
> Make sure then that para 3 is edited to remove (though never formalised),
> possibly adding a reference to formalisation process.
> Deirdre
> 
> 
> On 16 February 2010 08:26, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro at hotmail.com>wrote:
> 
>>  Thank you, Jeremy, for the first draft.
>>
>> I think than in the 3rd para, we could refer to the relevant decisions by
>> the ECOSOC that actually formalized the participation of other stakeholders
>> in the work of the CSTD, e g.:
>>
>> Responsibility for system-wide follow-up  of the WSIS outcomes, including
>> the IGF, was granted  to ECOSOC, with the actual review and assessment work
>> tasked to the CSTD, one of its functional commissions, which for this
>> purpose was to be strengthened "taking into account the multistakeholder
>> approach".   (Tunis Agenda, para 105).  The "opening" of the CSTD to other
>> stakeholders was formalized in ECOSOC decisions 2007/215, 2007/216, 2008/217
>> and 2008/218. According to these decisions,  all WSIS-accredited NGOs,
>> academic entities and private sector representatives were invited to
>>  participate in the work of the CSTD.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Yrjö
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 10:52:02 +0000
>> To: jeremy at ciroap.org; governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> From: email at hakik.org
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing CSTD
>>
>>
>> Paragraph four may elaborated further including a few success cases that
>> have been initiated by civil societies in several countries aiming at WSIS
>> missions. They have elevated Internet governance platforms in those
>> countries. Further progress of them requires substantive support in terms of
>> policy issues and state level patronization. These will roll out the process
>> of inclusive society to achieve the target set at several IGF sessions and
>> will open the door to continue as such in future.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Hakikur Rahman
>>
>>
>> At 10:13 16-02-2010, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>
>> As agreed, please find below a draft letter to the UNSG (United Nations
>> Secretary-General) expressing our strong concern about the usurpation of the
>> role of the civil society-friendly CSTD (Commission on Science and
>> Technology for Development) in reviewing the conclusions of the UNSG on the
>> continuation of the IGF.  This is based closely on Wolfgang's post to the
>> list that followed on from mine and Yrjö's.  This is just a first draft, and
>> I might have missed some recent discussions as I'm composing this in the air
>> between the US and Europe.
>>
>> Dear Sir,
>>
>> As a strong supporter of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and its unique
>> multi-stakeholder process, the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus
>> writes to express a concern about what we see as a potential weakening of
>> that process, in the revelation at the last IGF open consultation meeting on
>> 10 February that your recommendations on the continuation of the IGF will
>> not be reviewed by the CSTD (Commission on Science and Technology for
>> Development).  In raising this concern, we are joining our voice to those of
>> several governments who spoke to similar effect at that open consultation
>> meeting.
>>
>> This recognition of the principle of "multistakeholderism" in the Tunis
>> Agenda 2005 was the biggest conceptual achievement in WSIS and was in
>> particular accepted as a guiding principle for Internet Governance in
>> contrast to a "one stakeholder (intergovernmental) approach". The acceptance
>> of civil society as an "equal parter" (in their specific role) was a big
>> step for civil society. This was paved by the constructive and substantial
>> work the civil society representatives did during WSIS I and II, documented
>> in particular in the WSIS Civil Society Declaration, adopted in Geneva in
>> December 2003 and handed over officially to the Heads of States (who
>> accepted it) in the Closing Ceremony of WSIS I, and in the contribution to
>> the results of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG).  The
>> launch of the IGF as a "multistakeholder discussion platform" was the result
>> of this.
>>
>> Responsibility for system-wide follow-up and review of the WSIS outcomes,
>> including the IGF, was granted to ECOSOC through its CSTD, and this role was
>> to be managed using a multi-stakeholder approach (Tunis Agenda, para 105).
>> The "opening" of the CSTD was a very complicated procedure which was first
>> (in 2006) established as a preliminary exception, but was later taken for
>> granted (though never formalized).  It allows for all WSIS-accredited NGOs,
>> and private sector representatives, to participate as active observers.  In
>> fact, the ECOSOC decisions that opened CSTD up to other stakeholders speak
>> about "participating in the work" of it, rather than just observing.
>>
>> With this structure in place, the CSTD drafted the annual ECOSOC
>> resolutions on the WSIS follow-up for 2007-2009, including assessments on
>> the performance of the IGF.  There is no reason for a sudden departure from
>> this process on the question of the continuation of the IGF.
>>
>> In contrast, ECOSOC itself is not a multi-stakeholder institution.  Whilst
>> ECOSOC has accredited NGOs, all they can do is to send written statements
>> which are published before the meeting. They have no right to negotiate, no
>> right to speak, and no right to access the meeting room to brief (or lobby)
>> delegates.  Moreover, the private sector has no representation within ECOSOC
>> at all.
>>
>> In other words, to move the debate to ECOSOC means to silence an open and
>> transparent debate among governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. It
>> would mark a return to the pre-WSIS time when civil society (and the private
>> sector) were removed from the room after the ceremonial speeches of the
>> opening sessions ended and the real debate started in June 2002. It took
>> three years and ten PrepComs to change this.
>>
>> We request you to take steps to redress this anomaly, by transmitting your
>> recommendations on the continuation of the IGF to the CSTD for consideration
>> at its May meeting, where they will be open for review by non-governmental
>> stakeholders, as befits the review of a unique multi-stakeholder
>> institution. We would also like to take this opportunity to reiterate our
>> support for the continuation of the IGF as a multi-stakeholder forum for the
>> discussion of Internet-related public policy issues, located in Geneva, with
>> an independent budget and a Secretariat under contract with the United
>> Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA).
>>
>> Thank you for your consideration.
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Jeremy Malcolm
>> Project Coordinator*
>> Consumers International
>> Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
>> Malaysia
>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
>> *CI is 50
>> *Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer movement in
>> 2010.
>> Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect consumer
>> rights around the world.
>> * http://www.consumersinternational.org/50*
>>
>> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765>.
>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up
>> now. <https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================
____________________________________________________________
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