[Précédent par date]
[Index par date]
[Suivant by date]
[Précédent par thème]
[Index par thème]
[Suivant par thème]
[Previous by date]
[Index by date]
[Next by date]
[Previous by thread]
[Index by thread]
[Next by thread]
Passes - The latest scandal
Hi all,
I've followed the exchanges regarding the issue of passes for the
summit. They expresses the latest scandal regarding the process.
First of all, this issue has been in formal or informal discussion for
a while, at least since early November. I've heard about that
informally at that time, and was asked for advice. The latest
arrangement that should have been suggested by the CSB was the one
recently recalled by Sean, i.e. a fair repartition of half of the total
passes among "families" and caucuses/WG (fair meaning that caucuses/WG
can allocate twice the number of passes allocated by "families"), the
other half of the total being allocated on a first come first served
basis. Moreover, if I well remember, these badges shouldn't have been
nominative badges, i.e. they could be passed along from one person to
another from the same caucus/WG, under the responsibility of the
caucuses.
Second, let me recall what I've continuously said since PrepCom2
regarding the CSB: apart perhaps for some of them, most are not
representative of anything. My organization, which is supposed to
"belong" to at least three "families" (Europe&North America, NGOs,
social networks or whatever this is called), has never been consulted
on anything, apart from the remarkable efforts from Sean and Angela to
keep the plenary aware of important decisions being made in our names.
Third, most of the "families", as designated by the CSD, either have no
meaning or have nothing to do with civil society. I wont give again the
arguments for that, I'm tired of doing this.
Fourth, the "families" are unbalanced and at the same time overlapping
: e.g. the NGO "family" obviously includes many more entities than any
other "family" and regional groups obviously overlap with "statutory"
groups. What is the point then in giving the same amount to each
"family" ?!
Fifth, it's really interesting to see at the same time the latest
tentative to discredit the civil society self-organization through
caucuses and WG, coordinated by the Content & Themes group, and its
work since the beginning of the process. We have already seen that on
this list, short before PrepCom3.
Finally, we can say that the CSB has played his role towards the CSD
and the executive secretariat as a whole. Not towards the civil society
organizition participating to the WSIS process.
The only really fair process would be to provide passes to any CS
organization accredited to WSIS (which means at least participation in
the process), and, since rooms are limited in capacity, let pass
holders in on a first come first served basis. This is enough security
ensuring: these organizations are known enough from the huge amount of
paper they had to provide.
Any additional pass provided to "new comers just for the show" is the
business of the executive secretariat, not ours.