[gnso-ppsc-wg] Your feedback requested - section 3.3. Process Integrity

[Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>]

3.3. Process Integrity

WGs are encouraged to focus and tailor their work efforts to achieve the 
identified goals of the Charter. While minimum attendance and participation 
requirements are not explicitly recommended, a Chair is expected, as outlined 
above, to take the necessary measures to ensure that all WG members have an 
opportunity to provide their input on issues and decisions. WG members should 
be mindful that, once input/comment periods have been closed, discussions or 
decisions should not be resurrected unless there is group consensus that the 
issue should be revisited in light of new information that has been introduced.

Members should be encouraged to consider whether, if they cannot participate 
faithfully in the WG’s process (e.g. attending meetings, providing input, 
monitoring discussions), they should formally withdraw. It should be noted that 
there are no rules or requirements as to what constitutes sufficient or 
adequate ‘participation’; this is an assessment that each WG member should make 
individually.

________________________________
Comments

GD: In the first paragraph of Section 3.3, the document discusses the 
re-opening of deliberations once a topic has been closed.  In our opinion, this 
is an area that repeatedly causes delay and frustration in working groups.  We 
recommend the PPSC WG-WT develop some additional guidance in this area, 
particularly with respect to the Chair’s ability to declare a topic formally 
“closed,” and under what conditions the working group might revive it. This may 
also address the related problem when a long-absent working group member 
re-joins the working group and wishes to re-open previous topics.