Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] Draft paragraph for temporary agreement on qualifying criteria

[Alain Berranger <alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Avri,

3 quick points:

*1) "I see the ECOSOC accreditation for general consultative status as
relevant as any other criteria, perhaps more so - there are only 146 of
these..  I have seen the process organizations go through to get this
accreditation.  It is not easy and it is not quick  and it requires the
approval of the States that sit on the Council."*

Please share why you see it as relevant? Does being on the lsit indicate
the need to receive a priviledge like what we are discussing? Is being on
the list a guarantee that the listed NGOs are working for the public
interest and/or producing public goods and services? How does one NGO argue
it represents civil society? Many are self-appointed!!!!
*
*
*2) "...and while APC is a member of the APC..."*

You probably meant APC is a member of the NCSG..., right?

* 3) "...it requires the approval of the States that sit on the Council.*

For the multitude of NGOs seen as ennemies of the states or of governments,
I do not think that a state's approval is that impartial or even relevant?
it may even be totally subjective!... (Under Mubarak, a new NGO law in
Egypt was regressive and clearly  intended to muzzle freedom of speech and
in certain cases put NGO leaders in prison... and some even died there...)
 but we are looking for a list with some degree of objectivity... In fact,
the UN system is biased in favor of governments in general (where most of
their budget comes from) and is notorious for being un-at-ease with
multistakeholder models  like ICANN's that theoretically put governments,
private sector and civil society on equal footing... Look at ITU where
governments come first, private sector second and civil society last...

Alain

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I see the ECOSOC accreditation for general consultative status as relevant
> as any other criteria, perhaps more so - there are only 146 of these..  I
> have seen the process organizations go through to get this accreditation.
>  It is not easy and it is not quick  and it requires the approval of the
> States that sit on the Council.
>
> avri
>
> Note: as I mentioned in the chat, I am an associate member and volunteer
> staff member of an organization that has ECOSOC general consultative
> accreditation and considers it an important thing.  I have never consulted
> this organization, Association for Progressive Communications (APC),  as to
> whether they feel the need for name or acronym protection.  I participate
> in this WG as a NCSG member, and while APC is a member of the APC, never
> thought of them as possibly benefiting from this extra protection until
> today when we started talking about ECOSOC coincidental with a week when I
> am trying to get my ECOSOC UN grounds' pass.
>
> On 6 Mar 2013, at 15:03, Alain Berranger wrote:
>
> > I do not think the ECOSOC list  is of much relevance to this exercise.
> It is a relatively exclusive or even ad-hoc club of NGOs that work with the
> UN or have collaborated with the UN at some point in their history. It
> lists over 3000 NGOs - way too much for the kind of priviledges we are
> discussing and not necessarely representative of the millions of NGOs in
> the world. This list offers no  reassurance of some kind of international
> status (like the Red Crescent Society of Algeria is on the list but not the
> Red Crescent Society of Morocco or Tunisia - I don't see the IFRC there -
> maybe not looking at the right place as the public list is not
> searchable... how does that make sense for our purpose here?). It is almost
> an arbitrary list....of "friends" of the UN.... a little like those on
> Facebook who have 3000 "friends".... Or to put it differenty perhaps, there
> are hundreds of thousands of NGOs, probably more, with generous and
> worthwhile public good missions not on this lis!
>  t...
> >
> > Alain
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:55 PM, <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Draft of working framework for qualifying criteria - to be further
> discussed (including added to or changed, if appropriate) upon discussion
> of possible protection mechanisms:
> >
> > "The Working Group (WG) agrees that the following is a general
> description and starting point for final resolution of the types of
> organizations that may qualify for protection mechanisms (if any). The WG
> believes that it would be useful, in coming to a final resolution of
> qualifying criteria, to park the issue for now in order to discuss possible
> protection mechanisms, which discussion may inform the WG's deliberations
> over qualifying criteria. The WG intends to return to the issue of
> qualifying criteria at an appropriate point in its discussions of possible
> protection mechanisms.
> >
> > The basic ground upon which either an IGO or INGO may qualify for
> specific protections is that an organization has a mission that is in the
> global public interest and whose operations are international in scope. The
> WG acknowledges that it is extremely difficult to define the global public
> interest and it may be that it would be inappropriate for either it or
> ICANN to attempt to do so. Nevertheless, the WG agrees that the following
> factors may serve as indications that a particular organization would
> qualify for protection:
> >
> > (1) The organization, its names, acronyms and (where applicable) its
> designation are protected by an international treaty; or
> > (2) The organization, its names, acronyms and (where applicable) its
> designation are protected by national laws in multiple jurisdictions, and
> its organizational mission is recognized through inclusion on the ECOSOC
> list of general consultative NGOs (or similar list)."
> >
> > Cheers
> > Mary
> >
> > Mary W S Wong
> > Professor of Law
> > Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
> > Chair, Graduate IP Programs
> > UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
> > Two White Street
> > Concord, NH 03301
> > USA
> > Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > Phone: 1-603-513-5143
> > Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
> > Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network
> (SSRN) at:http://ssrn.com/author=437584
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Member, Board of Directors, CECI,
http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger


AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire
ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le
destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au
destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement
interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le
reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint ou
si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer
sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de
votre coopération.

CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use
of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by anyone
other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person responsible for
forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose,
distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or
in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this e-mail and
destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.