I thought it best to share this with =
the caucus. I=20
think it's important to understand the context and I will be next =
forwarding=20
Sean's five points as mentioned in his e-mail below. I seek your views =
on this=20
matter and if as Asia Pacific, we would like to support Sean's=20
call.
I totally agree =
with=20
Renata that we need to build on trust in the Bureau. But this is =
also why=20
I believe that John Gagain is severely out of order in the note he has =
sent=20
around to Bureau members, to the CS Plenary List and to the Content =
Themes Group=20
list. I do not at all question his motives, but trust also =
involves=20
respecting previous decisions and working from the same basics. =
John has=20
stated in no uncertain terms (copied below) that he believes that the =
Civil=20
Society Plenary, as it has been constituted at WSIS meetings, does not =
in fact=20
exist, and that (if it did) it has no authority to take decisions on =
behalf of=20
civil society.
I was not at the Bureau meeting and have not seen =
the=20
minutes, so I cannot comment on the issue of Chairing the Bureau. =
But I do=20
believe that it is entirely out of order for any member, let alone a =
purported=20
Co-Chairperson, of the Civil Society Bureau to claim that the entity =
from which=20
the Bureau ultimately derives its legitimacy does not exist. =
Such=20
a statement, especially made so publicly by the purported Chair of the =
Bureau,=20
is highly provocative and risks discrediting the entire efforts of civil =
society=20
to develop a credible and coherent presence at the WSIS.
I =
believe that=20
the Bureau must disassociate ourselves clearly from this statement, in =
equally=20
certain terms. I greatly regret that John has sent this around, =
and I=20
believe it will inevitably damage the credibility of the Bureau in the =
eyes of=20
civil society.
In another note that I am sending in response to =
John on=20
the other lists, I note five points that I thought had been agreed =
between us=20
all. I believe that the Bureau must also affirm these, or similar. =
We must=20
work from the same assumptions if we, and civil society as a =
whole, is to=20
retain credibility.
Sean
John wrote (my bold):=20
CS Information Session =
and=20
Debriefing There does not exist a forum at the WSIS referred to as =
"Civil=20
Society Plenary", nor was there ever one at any other U.N. sponsored =
Summit in=20
the past. A Plenary signifies a fixed group of members or member =
states=20
and the actual official definition is: 1. Complete in all respects, =
unlimited or full: a diplomat with plenary powers, 2. Fully attended =
by all=20
qualified members: a plenary session of the council. As you =
can see,=20
Civil Society does not fulfill this definition or its =
prerequisites. =20
...=20
... as I mention above, there is no CS Plenary; and especially =
not one=20
that makes decisions on behalf of Civil Society. This idea =
would=20
never work especially due to the fact that the composition of Civil =
Society at=20
the WSIS is always changing from meeting-to-meeting, =
session-to-session; and=20
is never consistent. Please see the definition of Plenary =
above.