Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] accreditation of Human Rights in China

[Meryem Marzouki <marzouki@ras.eu.org>]

Hi all,

As far as I'm concerned, this is all what I can do before wednesday, 
being stuck in Paris for 2 full-days conference...
But the HR will indeed react, in coordination with our member HRIC.
Best,
Meryem

Début du message réexpédié :

> De: Meryem Marzouki <marzouki@ras.eu.org>
> Date: Lun 19 sep 2005  20:27:09 Europe/Paris
> À: plenary@wsis-cs.org
> Objet: Rép : [WSIS CS-Plenary] accreditation of Human Rights in China
> Répondre à: plenary@wsis-cs.org
>
> [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire 
> list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for 
> specific people]
>
> Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic 
> translation of this message!
> _______________________________________
>
> Dear Bertrand and all,
>
> Of course, we will, specially since HRIC is a member of the HR caucus, 
> and that we have closely followed this issue from the beginning. This 
> is not the first time HRIC is denied accreditation at WSIS, but this 
> time we have made 'progress' in that the issue was at least discussed 
> in plenary.
> But Milton and Tracey are right: this is not only a HR caucus issue, 
> this concerns all civil society at WSIS. What happened to HRIC could 
> happen to any of us, as soon as a governement delegation is willing to 
> object. This has a name, and is called the reign of the arbitrary.
> HRIC has basically been asked to do the impossible: bring the proof 
> that they haven't received funding from government that haven't 
> actually funded them. HRIC has however done that, by providing a 
> letter of their financial auditor confirming that HRIC does not have 
> direct government funding ! But what the Chinese government actually 
> wanted is the list of anonymous INDIVIDUAL donors, which HRIC refuses 
> to disclose to protect these people from intimidation or any other 
> risk. As HRIC argued many times, governements cannot be anonymous 
> donors, in any case.
> Again, this could happen to any of us. This is the reason why we 
> should all stand with HRIC. Not to mention the fact that, to my 
> knowledge, the ES has not even made public the list of CS 
> organizations which they haven't recommended for accreditation, not 
> even mentionning that also reasons for non recommendations should be 
> disclosed. This process then lacks the minimum of transparency.
>
> HRIC representatives will have the opportunity to express themselves 
> more in details during the HR caucus panel that will be held on 
> Thursday Sept. 22 afternoon, 16:00-18:00 in Room XXII. HRIC is a 
> member of the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, an 
> accredited NGO and a member of the HR caucus.
>
> I hope that the whole CS at WSIS will support a common statement, and 
> that this issue of HRIC denial of accreditation will be raised at the 
> CS press conference.
>
> Best,
> Meryem
>
> Le lundi, 19 sep 2005, à 16:56 Europe/Paris, Bertrand de La Chapelle a 
> écrit :
>
> > I cannot imagine that the Human Rights Caucus isn't already 
> > considering preparing such a statement right away ?
> >  
> > Bertrand 
> >
> >  
> > On 9/19/05, Tracey Naughton <tracey@traceynaughton.com> wrote:
> >
> > [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire 
> > list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for 
> > specific people]
> >
> > Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic 
> > translation of this message!
> > _______________________________________
> >
> > Milton et all,
> >
> > I was thinking the same thing last night. I prepared the
> > accreditation request for the Media Institute of Southern Africa,
> > when I worked there. While the submission was thoughtfully and
> > carefully prepared I have no doubt at all that hours more work could
> > have gone into it to ensure that all details of the organisation and
> > its sources of income were included. This was not a matter of non-
> > disclosure, but an approach of adequate disclosure to present the
> > nature of work and main income sources of the organisation. The
> > submission passed through without any further interrogation, let
> > alone to the extent that Human Rights in China's submission is being
> > examined.
> >
> > Clearly the Human Rights in China application has been singled out
> > for particular and microscopic attention for political reasons.
> >
> > I think it would be appropriate to formulate a statement noting that
> > the level of interrogation of this 'file' is not in proportion to
> > that afforded to other 'files'.
> >
> > Tracey Naughton
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Plenary mailing list
> > Plenary@wsis-cs.org
> > http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary@wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary