Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:20:12 +0800
From:  "RunningToddler" <amkt@apcwomen.org>
Subject:  [communication 697] Fw: WSIS: Proposal for CT priorities draft
To:  "AP WSIS Caucus" <communication@wsisasia.org>
Message-Id:  <009b01c334dd$1762e600$2bcefea9@kryssq1o9vc6nq>
X-Mail-Count: 00697

Hi Everyone,

Here is Sally's proposal of sub-committee 2 on Content and Themes, to pull
together the Civil Society Consensus Document.

Please have a read and determine if we would like to contribute to the
specific questions raised. The "7 musts" Sally refers to is the contribution
of APC/APC WNSP and will be addressed by them.

Warm regards,

Angela

>From: "Sally Burch - ALAI" <sburch@alainet.org>
>To: ct-drafting@wsis-cs.org
>Subject: [Ct-drafting] Proposal for CT priorities draft
>Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 12:37:58 -0500
>
>Friends,
>
>Here are my proposals for the drafting work on CS priorities:
>
>The central issues (no surprise) are still pretty much those
>we have identified previously.  What may change here is that,
>from the 7 musts identified in February, some are more present
>than others in the texts and one or two other issues have
>emerged as possible additional priorities.
>
>Please revise and react to the proposals and question below as
>soon as possible so we can move forwards with the drafting.
>Please also indicate which paragraph(s) you're willing/able to
>work on.
>
>My suggestion is that, while the "Seven musts" describes the
>issues in two or three lines, mainly in terms of principles,
>this new text should be a bit more developed and focus
>particularly on the action plan items, though in generic
>terms.  Eg. "the action plan must address.."  "a priority area
>for action is.", without necessarily detailing the action to
>the taken.  Principles should be underlined mainly where the
>present text of the declaration is highly deficient.
>
>However, since we cannot assume that anything at present in
>the documents will still be there in the next version, we
>should be careful not to omit key issues that we know to be
>controversial, and therefore in danger of being left out due
>to lack of agreement.
>
>1) As a preamble, I suggest we focus briefly on the
>"information society", what we mean by it and what is
>inacceptable in the present text. It includes being aware of
>the "negative" side of the IS and the need to provide the
>necessary controls and measures to counteract (I'll come back
>to this in a further message and would be willing to work on
>this).
>
>2) Following our 7 musts:  Presumably we should keep these 7?
>Sholud we change the order?
>
>Sustainable development: some things we could include here are
>the solidarity principle in development; sustainable and
>remote energy sources; .
>
>Democratic governance: the respective caucus is working on a
>text for the Internet governance issues.  We need to identify
>priorities relating to ICTs for citizen participation etc.
>This might also relate to the mention of the role of civil
>society, which is highly unsatisfactory in the present
>documents.  Also policies to promote development of a public
>sphere.  Accountability.
>
>Literacy, education and research:  the academia and research
>group has produced a summary of priorities (in Spanish) that
>I've sent to Bill to post.
>
>Human rights: see HR and communication rights caucus docs.
>
>Global knowledge commons: several caucuses have produced
>input on this.  IPR- related issues. (I suggest the emphasis on IPR
>be more on protection of information in the public domain, rather
>than on changing existing IPR protections ­ important but unlikely
>to be accepted.)
>
>Cultural and linguistic diversity: would this be the place to include
>something on diversity of the media, community media,
>empowering communities?  (The community media caucus,
>recently formed, has produced proposals and is concerned that
>there is no mention of community media in the official docs).
>
>"Information security": support the APC demand for an in depth
>debate and rethinking of the issues.
>
>
>3) Other issues:
>
>The following are important but not included above, though
>they might fit into one or other of the above issues:
>
>- Open architecture and common standards: I think these are
>key technological issues that WSIS might actually come up with
>relevant agreements on, and that are key to maintaining the
>Internet as an open and non-proprietary space.  Should we
>include a separate Must, or does this fit, for example, in
>governance??? Or security???
>
>- Access and infrastructure issues: a priority, among others,
>for Africa.  Does it fit into one of the above?  From what
>angle should we approach it?
>
>- Gender (relates to all issues; how should we deal with it?)
>Emphasis on a gender approach from conception and not as an
>add-on.  Is present in the documents but not adequately so.
>
>Sally
>
>
>__________________________________________________________
>Sally Burch - Directora Ejecutiva
>Agencia Latinomericana de Informacion -
>INTERNET: sburch@alainet.org
>Direccion:  Casilla 17-12-877, Quito-Ecuador
>Telefono: (593 2) 250 5074 / 222 1570  / 252 8716
>Fax: (593 2) 250 5073    URL:  http://alainet.org
>__________________________________________________________
>_______________________________________________
>Ct-drafting mailing list
>Ct-drafting@wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/ct-drafting


_______________________________________________
Apc-ir-team mailing list
Apc-ir-team@lists.apc.org
http://lists.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/apc-ir-team