[governance] REVISION 3 Draft statement to UNSG on bypassing

[Jeanette Hofmann]

I support Deidre's reasoning (for dropping para 5) and her suggestions.

And: the fact that the language in the original is odd doesn't mean that 
  we have to repeat it. If we find better language to make our point 
clear whe should do so. So, what is the specific point of the following 
sentence: For this purpose it was to be strengthened "taking into 
account the multistakeholder approach"

jeanette


jeanette

Deirdre Williams wrote:
> 
> 
> On 18 February 2010 05:46, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org 
> <mailto:jeremy at ciroap.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On 18/02/2010, at 5:31 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> 
>      > 3. para: The following sentence is somewhat odd and I do not
>     really understand it: "For
>      > > this purpose it was to be strengthened "taking into account the
>      > > multistakeholder approach"  (Tunis Agenda, para 105)."
> 
>     The odd wording is not ours, though, it's the TA's.  It does
>     literally call for "strengthening of the Commission, taking into
>     account the multi-stakeholder approach".  So I think we should
>     retain this, odd as it is.
> 
> 
> What you might do is " For this purpose it was to be "[strengthened] 
> ... taking into account the multi-stakeholder approach" (Tunis Agenda, 
> para 105)
> 
> 
>      > 5. para: can be dropped I think
> 
>     Does anyone else think it should be dropped (personally I feel this
>     paragraph is rather important)?  It says this:
> 
>     The CSTD is not a multistakeholder institution, and hence we would
>     welcome further enhancement of the participation of non-governmental
>     stakeholders in the IGF review.  However even as it stands, the CSTD
>     does provide relatively greater multistakeholder involvement than
>     its parent body, ECOSOC.  Whilst ECOSOC has accredited NGOs, their
>     influence is limited and much of their expertise is not taken into
>     consideration by ECOSOC.  More importantly, there are many NGOs that
>     were accredited at WSIS but which are not in consultative status
>     with ECOSOC, and the private sector has no representation within
>     ECOSOC at all.
> 
> 
> I agree with Jeannette. My reasons - if we are asking to preserve the 
> status quo, do what has been done each time previously, then I don't 
> think we should confuse the issue with explanations. The justification 
> has been established by precedent - four times previously "everyone" 
> agreed that this was a good way to do things. 
> 
> For perhaps similar reasons I object to the sentence 
> 
> Should it not be possible to do this, civil society's confidence in the 
> legitimacy of the resolution on the continuation of the IGF that is 
> ultimately made by the General Assembly might well be reduced.
> 
> because it sounds like a threat without backup. I would prefer to state 
> it positively:
> 
> Civil society's confidence in this process (WSIS I and II, the IGF) has 
> been steadily enhanced and encouraged over a period of ten years. We are 
> committed to a multistakeholder process involving all partners, and look 
> forward to continuing this engagement.
> 
> I'm all for Disraeli's approach - "don't complain, don't explain" :-)
> Deirdre
> 
> 
>     I don't have any problem with your other suggestions.
> 
>     --
>     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.
> 
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>         governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>     To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>         governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>     <mailto: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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir 
> William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
> 
____________________________________________________________
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