I also want to congratulate both our Coordination Committee and the individual speakers. To have five civil society spaekers in a Special session of the United Nations General Assembly is remarkable. It was also important to demonstrate that CS in this IG space is (still) united around values - mainly human rights and sustainable development - but is also diverse and has different approaches if it comes to the details. 

On the other hand, the whole procedure of the WSIS 10+ review process has to be questioned. The exclusion of non-governmental stakeholders in the final negotiations can not be a model for future Internet Governance discussions. One have to recognize that the two co-facilitators (and the president of the UNGA) did much more than one could expect to give non-governmental stakeholders opportunities to express their voices. However the future for producing outcome has to go beyond an "inter-governmental committee" which "consults" with stakeholders. The WSIS 10+ plenary during the IGF in Brazil, November 2015, was remarkable. Four micophones with four queues and one screen where language was emerging in an open dialogue. It demonstrated that the "NetMundial" model (with its even greater complexity) can work. Here we can see the first lights of a new Approach in the future. And the IGF - now safe for ten years - could be the bridge-builder for new innovative multistakeholder mechanisms and outcomes. 

However, there is a long way to go. And there are different cultures. I recommend to read the speeches by president Xi and prime minister Medwedjew in Wuzhen. It is also worth to look into the details of the procedures of the "World Internet Conference" in Wuzhen, how stakeholders are placed and included and how this matches the criteria of opness, bottom up., transparent etc. I see some Problems but also interesting steps Forward. And I see some cross-fertilization among various "Internet World Summits". It would be good if a young academic would write a paper to compare procedures and substance of NetMundial, WSIS 10+ and WIC. 

Wolfgang



Hi

Whatever is done in this regard, I thought it was awesome to have three NCUC/SG speakers talking from the same podium that heads of state use every Autumn.

Bill

> On Dec 16, 2015, at 4:33 PM, Remmy Nweke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> FYI
> As some of know, I was part of the Selection Committee for WSIS+10 speakers for Civil society.
> Here below is an update
> 
> "We have just been informed that OPGA has made two changes to the civil society speakers nominated for WSIS+10. Tatiana Kapinga, who was unable to secure a US visa, and Anriette Esterhuysen, who was unable to stay to address the meeting, were replaced by Deborah Brown of APC and Matthew Shears of Center for Democracy and Technology. 
> 
> "While not wishing to be critical of either of the people chosen, The Civil Society Selection Committee believes that, despite the short timeframe,  it should have been consulted about these changes. In particular, we are concerned that the changes made by OGPA resulted in four of our five speakers being from WEOG areas. This lack of geographic balance is unfortunate, and could have been avoided.
> 
> "We will convey our disappointment to OPGA at a later stage, but wanted civil society networks to be aware of this issue."