[governance] Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing CSTD

Tue Feb 16 09:47:59 EST 2010

My intention was to suggest that para 3 would be entirely replaced by this:
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.

Sorry for not being clear,
Yrjö

> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:17:05 -0200
> From: ca at cafonso.ca
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; williams.deirdre at gmail.com
> CC: yrjo_lansipuro at hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: [governance] Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing CSTD
> 
> 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
> ====================================

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100216/840679f9/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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