[governance] Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing CSTD

Tue Feb 16 13:12:00 EST 2010

Important tweak needed

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Renate Bloem \(Gmail\)" <renate.bloem at gmail.com>
> Date: February 16, 2010 6:42:57 PM GMT+01:00
> To: "'William Drake'" <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
> Cc: "'Jeremy Malcolm'" <jeremy at ciroap.org>, '"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"' <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
> Subject: RE: [governance] Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing CSTD
> 
> You can forward this to the list
>  
> Renate
>  
> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch] 
> Sent: mardi, 16. février 2010 15:18
> To: Renate Bloem (Gmail)
> Cc: 'Jeremy Malcolm'; '"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"'
> Subject: Re: [governance] Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing CSTD
>  
> Hi,
>  
> THanks for this corrective Renate.  Would have been good to send to the list, but either way let's take it on board as the doc is tweaked.
>  
> Bill
>  
>  
> On Feb 16, 2010, at 12:22 PM, Renate Bloem (Gmail) wrote:
> 
> 
> Dear Malcolm,
>  
> This is a very good statement. However, what I said before and put here in red is not correct. NGOs in consultative status (there are more than 3500) can address ECOSOC; sit in the meetings and lobby governments, circulate language etc. I sat in numerous ECOSOC meetings, even spoke at the High-level section.
>  
> The problem is, of course, that many of WSIS CSOs do not have consultative status
>  
> So try to express the red part a little differently: e.g. that their influence is limited or that much of their expertise is not taken into consideration by ECOSOC …or ….. I leave this up to you.
>  
> I mentioned before that the Cardoso report (in which I was through consultations heavily engaged) failed to be adopted a.o. because governments used the argument that the Panel of Eminent Persons did not even accurately know the consultative arrangements.
>  
> This should not be said to this statement.
>  
> Since I am now only looking at this list from a far, I send thos only to you, Wolfgang and Bill.
>  
> Best wishes,
>  
> Renate
> --------
> Renate Bloem
> Past President of CONGO
> Civicus UN Geneva
> Tel:/Fax +33450 850815/16
> Mobile : +41763462310
> renate.bloem at civicus.org
> renate.bloem at gmail.com
> 
> CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
> PO BOX 933, 2135, Johannesburg, South Africa
> www.civicus.org
>  
>   
>  
>  
>  
> From: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:jeremy at ciroap.org] 
> Sent: mardi, 16. février 2010 11:13
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: [governance] Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing CSTD
>  
> 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. Don't print this email unless necessary.
>  
> <IGF Statement on CSTD ECOSOC.doc>
>  
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>  Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
> ***********************************************************
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100216/1e377519/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