Dear all,
Many thanks for Gillian and her supporting staffers at TI for making sense of the input of the WG-CC and digests for further commenting and refining.
I think the input of the WG-CC on the Draft Rules of Procedure would be a logical consequence of the work on the constitutive document.
Based on my ample experience with the way social networking, mainly powered by the Internet, a loose network, or in Internet lingo a "federated network" is the way to go.
As a matter of fact the way the Internet and its related technologies are developing is mirroring social networking in the real world, and often times it is not possible to tell which drives which.
The federated network concept conserves the full autonomy of its affiliated members yet its joint infrastructure is based on common ideologies, objectives and goals, and tool kits or skill sets, which to a certain extent are exercised or put into good use in collaborative efforts
We need to have individuals on board, particular in cases where CSOs are not possible because of repressive regimes, or restrictive legislation on the functioning of CSOs or simply because of the expertise provided by these individuals.
A membership affiliation is not recommendable.
Again I must use the HUGE success of the Avaaz organization, a 25 million plus Internet driven social network of engaged individuals .all over the world who collectively deal with all the issues hitherto the domains of Greenpeace, Amnesty International and even Transparency International, and who are scoring huge successes and are becoming the Facebook.com equivalent force in global civil society.
A coalition of CSOs with concentrated expertise, enriched with individuals who bring to the fore expertise, knowledge and other skills is the way to go for the UNCAC Coalition.
Milton Ponson, President
Rainbow Warriors Core Foundation
(Rainbow Warriors International)
Tel. +297 568 5908
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
Email: [log in to unmask]
CorruptionWatch Aruba is a local component of the Global Campaign Project Paradigm of Rainbow Warriors International, focusing on monitoring the rule of law, functioning and performance of the executive, legislative and judicial powers in Aruba and is member of the UNCAC coalition, promoting the UN Convention against Corruption
--- On Fri, 10/15/10, Gillian Dell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Gillian Dell <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Comments on Constitution
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Friday, October 15, 2010, 12:51 AM
Comments on Constitution
Hallo all,
So it's time to wrap up these excellent WG discussions on the draft constitutive document, though it would be great if this group could provide inputs on the draft Rules of Procedure,currently in preparation.
The next step: I will look for the most common ground possible and send a new draft to the Coalition on Monday, at which point you could still make comments.
Some comments before that step:
1. A loose network: The concept for the Coalition has to date been to have a loose network for joint advocacy and action but complete autonomy of members. Our activities have to date always been conducted on a consensus basis.
2. The key area of difference concerns Individual Members: In our discussions the most difficult issue turned out to be how to handle voting for individuals. At TI-S, we've had some internal discussions about this. We came to the conclusion that we do need to decide whether we are primarily a network of organisations or of individuals. In the past, the main idea has been to bring together organisations, as evidenced by the fact that our statements have thus far always been signed by organisations and not by individuals.
--In terms of fairness we have to consider whether some individuals should have the special status of membership in their own name whereas other individuals are barred from individual membership because they have joined a member organisation.
--In terms of objectives we should consider whether we are aiming to form a global mass membership organisation i.e. Are we seeking an unlimited number of members? Or are we seeking a limited number of individual members with special expertise?
Proposed solution: On balance we feel that the Coalition should be predominantly a network of CSOs. There should not be full member status for individuals. For elections, only CSOs should have a vote, except perhaps for the seat reserved for Individual Members. For decisions on statements and other issues, we always aim for consensus. In Coalition discussions, individuals should be free to express their views and thereby influence the direction of the Coalition's decisions. However, if it moves to a vote, again, they would not participate.
3. Other issues and proposed solutions
--Unless someone objects I will follow Toby's advice and remove the 2-year lifespan of the document given that we also have a clause providing for an amendment process.
--Despite support for allowing an international CSO like TI to have more than 2 national groups on the Coordination Committee, we will include the 3 seat limit in the next draft. We will have to see how TI National Chapters and others react.
All the best,
Gillian
From: Coalition WG on Coordination Committee on behalf of Toby Mendel
Sent: Thu 14/10/2010 03:11
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Comments on Constitution
Hi all,
A few comments:
1) Under 5), we say that the private sector is excluded (in addition to
excluding the profit-making sector). In many countries, NGOs are
considered to be part of the private sector. I think it is enough to
exclude the profit-making sector.
2) Re. 7(7), I think it will be more practical if the CC can approve its
own rules (otherwise, it would need to wait until a Membership meeting to
change them and this will also divert the energies of the Membership
meeting which has more important things to discuss). Also, I think it is
important to stipulate quorum for these meetings in the constitutive
document (I think you will find this is common practice). This can easily
be done by adding that quorum for meetings is 7 members in 6(c)(5).
3) I fully agree with the comments on the 2-year renewal idea. This is not
practical both because we might wish to introduce changes before then and
because we don't want to go through this whole process again in just two
years.
4) Re. the upper limit on CC members, I think we all very much appreciate
the effort and support of TI in the Coalition. That is not the point. The
point, as far as I am concerned, is that if we want to have a democratic
entity, we need to limit the amount of power that one member and its
affiliates can control. In my view, control over the secretariat and the
potential to have 33% of the Coordinating Committee is too much. Hence my
suggestion to limit the CC participation to a maximum of three members.
5) The issue of individual members is difficult. In the end, however, I
agree with Gillian that we cannot equate organisations with individuals,
as (simplistically) satisfying as it may be to say one member one vote.
But I also agree that we cannot exclude individuals. The solution of
having a separate individuals vote for their member of the CC seems a
reasonable compromise to me.
Toby
___________________________________
Toby Mendel
Centre for Law and Democracy
[log in to unmask]
Tel: +1 902 431-3688
Fax: +1 902 431-3689
***********************************************
The WG-CC mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
To unsubscribe from the WG-CC list, click the following link:
http://community.lsoft.com/SCRIPTS/WA-LSOFTDONATIONS.EXE?SUBED1=WG-CC&A=1
or mailto: [log in to unmask]
Join the
anti-corruption community at the 14th International Anti-Corruption
Conference 10-13 November 2010,
Bangkok ,
Thailand . Information on speakers,
workshops and more, available here. Online Registration
closes 31 October, so act soon!
Transparency
International is the global civil society organisation leading the fight against
corruption.
www.transparency.org
This email is
confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure, distribution, printing or copying of this email
is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to the email, then delete all copies from your
computer. This email and its attachments have been swept for computer viruses
but Transparency International accepts no responsibility whatsoever for damage
caused by viruses in connection with this email. Transparency International may
monitor all emails and attachments as it is presumed that they are sent or
received in connection with the activities of TI and to ensure the integrity of
its computer systems. Statements and opinions contained in this email are those
of the sender, not necessarily of Transparency
International.
The WG-CC mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV® list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
To unsubscribe from the WG-CC list, click the following link:
http://community.lsoft.com/SCRIPTS/WA-LSOFTDONATIONS.EXE?SUBED1=WG-CC&A=1
or mailto: [log in to unmask]
***********************************************
The WG-CC mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
To unsubscribe from the WG-CC list, click the following link:
http://community.lsoft.com/SCRIPTS/WA-LSOFTDONATIONS.EXE?SUBED1=WG-CC&A=1
or mailto: [log in to unmask]