Hello everyone,
I thought it best to share this with the caucus. I think it's important =
to understand the context and I will be next forwarding Sean's five =
points as mentioned in his e-mail below. I seek your views on this =
matter and if as Asia Pacific, we would like to support Sean's call.
Warm regards,
Angela
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Sean O Siochru=20
To: bureau@geneva2003.org ; bureau@wsis-cs.org=20
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 7:44 PM
Subject: John's note on Civil Society Plenary=20
To: Members of the Bureau,
I totally agree with Renata that we need to build on trust in the =
Bureau. But this is also why I believe that John Gagain is severely out =
of order in the note he has sent around to Bureau members, to the CS =
Plenary List and to the Content Themes Group list. I do not at all =
question his motives, but trust also involves respecting previous =
decisions and working from the same basics.=20
John has stated in no uncertain terms (copied below) that he believes =
that the Civil Society Plenary, as it has been constituted at WSIS =
meetings, does not in fact exist, and that (if it did) it has no =
authority to take decisions on behalf of civil society.=20
I was not at the Bureau meeting and have not seen the minutes, so I =
cannot comment on the issue of Chairing the Bureau. But I do believe =
that it is entirely out of order for any member, let alone a purported =
Co-Chairperson, of the Civil Society Bureau to claim that the entity =
from which the Bureau ultimately derives its legitimacy does not exist. =
Such a statement, especially made so publicly by the purported Chair of =
the Bureau, is highly provocative and risks discrediting the entire =
efforts of civil society to develop a credible and coherent presence at =
the WSIS.
I believe that the Bureau must disassociate ourselves clearly from this =
statement, in equally certain terms. I greatly regret that John has =
sent this around, and I believe it will inevitably damage the =
credibility of the Bureau in the eyes of civil society.
In another note that I am sending in response to John on the other =
lists, I note five points that I thought had been agreed between us all. =
I believe that the Bureau must also affirm these, or similar. We must =
work from the same assumptions if we, and civil society as a whole, is =
to retain credibility.=20
Sean=20
John wrote (my bold):=20
1.. CS Information Session and Debriefing There does not exist a forum =
at the WSIS referred to as "Civil Society Plenary", nor was there ever =
one at any other U.N. sponsored Summit in the past. A Plenary signifies =
a fixed group of members or member states and the actual official =
definition is: 1. Complete in all respects, unlimited or full: a =
diplomat with plenary powers, 2. Fully attended by all qualified =
members: a plenary session of the council. As you can see, Civil =
Society does not fulfill this definition or its prerequisites. =20
b.. ...=20
c.. ... as I mention above, there is no CS Plenary; and especially not =
one that makes decisions on behalf of Civil Society. This idea would =
never work especially due to the fact that the composition of Civil =
Society at the WSIS is always changing from meeting-to-meeting, =
session-to-session; and is never consistent. Please see the definition =
of Plenary above.=20
___________________________________________________
Se=E1n =D3 Siochr=FA Central office: tel: +353 1 473 0599 fax: +353 1 =
473 0597=20
NEXUS Research Mobile: +353 87 20 48 150
14 Eaton Brae Direct office tel: +353 1 272 0739 fax: +353 1 272 0034 =
Shankill =20
Co. Dublin e-mail: sean@nexus.ie
Ireland Web site: http://www.iol.ie/nexus=20
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/2003
773_2.html (attatchment)