<html>
<font face="Optimum">friends,<br><br>
I submitted the following to the CT-list on behalf of Isis International
Manila, in response to the non-negotiables draft that was posted in the
various lists, and forgot to cc: copy this list.<br><br>
thank you Patcha for your hard work and holding up the interests of our
diverse whole continent on your shoulders. :-)<br><br>
susanna<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 01:12:30
+0800<br>
To: steve@commedia.org.uk, ct@wsis-cs.org<br>
From: Susanna George <susanna@isiswomen.org><br>
Subject: Re: [WSIS-CT] non-negotiables -draft text<br>
Cc: gswg-coord@genderit.org<br><br>
Dear Steve, Karen and all those who have worked on this
document,<br><br>
Thank you for what I think is an excellent document for the most
part. Following are some of my comments:<br><br>
1.<x-tab> </x-tab>Under No. 2 on Human
Rights, on the second sentence, where labour rights and the right to
development are listed, I feel that we should also list women's human
rights. so it would read, "labour rights, <b><i>women's human
rights</i></b>, and the right to development, as well as the principle of
non-discrimination..."<br><br>
2.<x-tab> </x-tab>Under No. 3 on
Sustainable Development, I would like to suggest the inclusion in the
second paragraph, second sentence of the following, "Market based
development solutions often fail to adress more deep rooted and
persistent inequalities, <b><i>particularly historical and geo-political
inequalities between nations of the North and South</i></b>.<br><br>
2.<x-tab> </x-tab>I agree with the
rewording of the title of No. 5 as suggested by Patcha and George Crewe,
to "Public Domain of Global Knowledge" rather than the
"Global Knowledge Commons", and also agree additionally to
their suggestion together with Muguet, to have the "Open Access to
Scientific Information" listed under No. 5<br><br>
3.<x-tab> </x-tab>We have discussed
the Gender paragraph in the NGO GSWG list, and Karen will be giving to
you all the recommended rewording of the Gender paragraph. My
feeling though is that this section, from points 7-10 feel disconnected
and laundry-list like. Gender, Disability, Labour issues all
constitute important facets of the broader social justice agenda, and
should be putting under a broader title such as Social Justice, and moved
up in the document to where Human Rights and Sustainable
Development is listed. I realise that it is not a hierarchy
of issues, but a list of equally essential demands of Civil
Society...even so, it would appear that these were the floating issues
that have somehow been pasted at the end, the way they look right
now.<br><br>
4.<x-tab> </x-tab>Lastly, i do not
think Ethics should be a separate paragraph. If I understand the
second sentence of the Ethics para, then it would be that this statement
opposing "simple formulae based merely on finance or the propogation
of technology" is in line with the statement in Point 3 on
Sustainable Development, and might be integrated there. I do not
understand the distinction being made here when asking for the "the
ethical dimension" to be "truly regarded as indispensible"
since this CS document is already a statement of principles starting with
the introduction, and all of the sections starting with human rights,
sustainable development and so on. I am also frankly very wary of
the institutionalised religious base of support that the notion of
"ethics" currently has in this debate and in the UN generally,
and would strongly object to being included in our statement of CS
Non-Negotiables.<br><br>
I hope that this is not coming in too late to be considered.<br><br>
regards, and salaams,<br><br>
susanna<br>
</font></blockquote><br>
</html>