[governance] Meeting report ECOSOC presentations

Wed Aug 3 12:09:32 EDT 2011

 Anriette great, I totally agree with you regarding the quality of
participation, especially with regard to the preparation. But there is also
another major factor is the local level where it often lacks a working
synergy between the actors in public institutions, private sector and
civil society
entities with expertise in the field of ICT. Locally, the debate is hardly
any between them, the official part of that not content to pocket the travel
expenses. It is often difficult to organize feedback sessions or meetings
preparatory before the sub-regional, regional or international  meetings. Thank
you Anriette to pin these problems that haunt us for many many years and yet
it is the reality in our country.

SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN

Téléphone mobile:+243998983491
email                  : b.schombe at gmail.com
skype                 : b.schombe
blog                    : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
Site Web             : www.ticafrica.net

2011/8/3 Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>

> Hi all
>
> Late response to this thread.
>
> Applying for ECOSOC status and being approved is not all that difficult.
> Filling in the 4-yearly reports is a lot of work though!  And if you
> don't, then you lose your status.
>
> I would encourage people to apply for ECOSOC status if they have the
> institutional infrastructure. It does make participation in the UN
> system easier.. not in the WSIS spaces so much, but in others. It also
> links you to broader civil society outside of our fairly narrow internet
> circles.
>
> But I am not advocating that ECOSOC status should be a requirement for
> participation in WSIS follow up processes.
>
> Re. CSTD.
>
> The rules are imperfect, yes. But they don't block civil society
> participation in any significant way from my perspective. If you don't
> have WSIS accreditation then it is very easy to register as a member of
> one of the NGOs that are accredited under WSIS or under ECOSOC. Civicus,
> APC, IT for Change, IISD, and there are many more.
>
> In the longer term we should definitely support more inclusive
> participation. But I don't think that is the primary barrier right now.
>
> At the first CSTD session in 2007 APC proposed that CSTD makes use of
> MAG to plan meetings. I still feel this would be useful. The secretariat
> does include civil society in panels, but we should have more influence
> on the actual agenda, e.g. participate in a Bureau discussion on
> upcoming sessions.
>
> I feel that the main problem has been that civil society has just not
> participated EFFECTIVELY even when they get to be in the room. We cannot
> really blame the CSTD for this. For example, very few organisations
> attend. Many more go to ICANN meetings, or to IGF open consultations.
> Why? When the CSTD requested civil society to submit input on the WSIS
> review, very few did.
>
> And then, those CS people that do attend meetings say very little. They
> tend to home in on issues narrowly.. e.g. IGF or multi-stakeholder
> participation. An issue like, for example, the importance of open source
> software for development is raised by governments, not by CS. Some CS
> present would support them, but most of us don't make substantial
> interventions.  Not to mention national science and technology
> policies.. a key theme at every CSTD. Perfect opportunity for CS to
> participate, and to make an impression.
>
> Our problem is not lack of accreditation in my view, but lack of
> preparation.
>
> ICC Basis comes prepared with a statement on very topic on the agenda.
> If business and the tech communities participates more effectively, I
> believe this can be attributed to organisation rather than accreditation
> rules.
>
> The fact that there are only 2 or 3 regular CS voices in the CSTD
> creates the impression that civil society is just not that interested.
> CSTD is far more open than other UN spaces (e.g. you don't have limited
> numbers of speaking slots as in the Human Rights Council for example and
> you don't have pre-apply for speaking slots).
>
> My suggestion is work on improving the quality and scope of our
> participation and then it will be much easier to challenge the rules,
> which are not really that restrictive. Of course this not easy as we
> lack time and resources.. but that in turn means we should use what time
> we do have wisely.
>
> I was thinking of recommending to CSTD that they run an orientation  for
> civil society before each session. I had the impression that those CS
> people who were at the CSTD for the first time did not know what the
> rules of procedure were.
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director, association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110803/ce24372a/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, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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