• mexico22 input3.8E

last modified August 8, 2022 by facilitfsm

WSF IC - FSM CI |    | CIMexico22                                                                                                                 ICoption1


 EN - ES - FR

 COMMENT of  http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/mexico22-input3.8d

Rita   on wsf ic whetsapp group 03.08

 

ENGLIS Rita   on wsf ic whetsapp group 03.08

commenting on Rita   http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/mexico22-input3.8d

Looking at the various proposals made for IC consensus (A) and decisions (B), we have this list of alternatives;


A - POSSIBLE RULES FOR CONSENSUS 


1 - Consensus will only be adopted unanimously-

 Consensus is not unanimity  : it is general acceptability  of a decision formulation : some organizations agreeing with it , some consenting to it , all accepting it

2 - The search for consensus will be mandatory in layers (up to 3?) until it runs out, and the limit will be the publication of the result, reservations and disagreements

3 - Consensus will be established by means of a pre-defined qualified majority

This option is not acceptable for those who are in favor of option 1  described here http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/mexico22-input3.7y

Note: It is not an alternative that a position of obstruction means the mandatory silencing of the Council (the reverse of the majority decision). Decision-making processes must be made public.

Comment about this note : the initial consensual  situation is that IC takes facilitation decisions and not  sociopolitical decisions,  assessing a change of this  consensus practice can be done through a consensus discussion,  better than through forced   unprepared discussions on specific cases as has been attempted in Montreal, in Mexico,  and recently on line (solidarity with moroccan human rights activist)       
 The discussions in IC are public and the tensions- discussions between advocates of option 1 and advocates of options 2 are made visible through videos and transcripts  visible here 
http://openfsm.net/projects/ic-extended  


B - POSSIBLE RULES FOR terms of reference about taking socio political positions in INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 

Description of 4 options visions about role of IC in WSF http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/mexico22-input3.7y

There are 4  possibilities

1 - The IC never takes  socio-political  positions,  besides upholding the WSF principles which describes values actions of partiicpants  coming  in WSF space  AND groups of  IC members can use their capacity of expression as participants in the WSF and their positions will be circulated by facilitation  as per principle 7  http://openfsm.net/projects/icmembers-declarations/ 

This is the current consensus orientation  acceptable by all IC members

This is part of option1 about IC :  IC as facilitator of WSF as a space is not mixing up with the specific position taking of its member  organizations that are free to share alone or in articulation the positions they voluntarily want to assume and share - The fact they are Cooperating in facilitaton as IC member organization does not imply that  those organiztions "have" to take positions on socio political issues together   

2 - The IC takes a stand on behalf of the WSF - Signs WSF

This is  the base intention expectation   of option3 about IC :  http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/mexico22-input3.7y - this is a contradiction in substance with IC declaring through adoption of WSF principles that WSF is a space that does not speak ( article 1 and 6). Declaring changed the nature of WSF is not acceptable for those in favour of option 1

3 - The IC takes a collegiate position on behalf of the IC as a whole - Signs the IC

This is  the base intention  expectation   of option2 about IC :  http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/mexico22-input3.7y  -This option is not acceptable for those who are in favor of option 1 , while for those  in favor of option 2,  expression of IC members through "IC member declarations" has been and  can continue being an acceptable alternative for this desire of expression. http://openfsm.net/projects/icmembers-declarations/ .

Declaring it unacceptable  would mean that" IC taking positions" is more important for them than "IC facilitating the WSF space process", which implies a discussion about why they are in IC 

4 - The IC takes a collegiate position on behalf of the IC meeting - Signs the IC Meeting on such day - with attendance list

This seems a euphemized version  of intention  expectation   of option2 about IC :  http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/mexico22-input3.7y  IC has a continuity as a facilitating body,  and  the notion of  position by an IC meeting  is a position by IC 

Observation - It is not an alternative the proposal of “whoever wants to sign” because this does not need advice for someone to sign a declaration. This is a collegiate decision of the meeting.
This observation is strange :  yes it is a fact that any group of ic members can make any declaration voluntarily in their own name, and, in the vision of option1 http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/mexico22-input3.7y  this is the consistent way  for them to express socio politicalpositions in WSF space, as any other group of participant organizations can do, not giving a special sociopolitical voice to the IC, which is a facilitating body 

So yes it is relevant to mention this possiblity  in the term of refernce 1 

 


PORTUGUÊS 

Rita   on wsf ic whetsapp group 03.08

Observando as várias propostas feitas para consenso (A) e decisões do CI (B), temos esta lista de alternativas;


A- REGRAS POSSÍVEIS PARA O CONSENSO


1 - Consenso só será adotado por unanimidade

2 - A busca do consenso será obrigatória em camadas (até 3?)  até que se esgote, sendo que o limite será a publicização do resultado, ressalvas e discordâncias

3 - Consenso será estabelecido por meio de uma maioria qualificada pré-definida


Observação: Não é uma alternativa que uma posição de obstrução signifique o silenciamento impositivo do Conselho (o avesso da decisão por maioria). Processos decisórios devem ser tornados públicos. 


II - REGRAS POSSÍVEIS PARA POSIÇÕES DO CONSELHO INTERNACIONAL 


1 - O CI nunca toma posicoes 

2 - O CI toma posicao em nome do FSM - Assina FSM

3 - O CI toma posi;’ao colegiada em nome do conjunto do CI - Assina CI

4 - O CI toma posicao colegiada em nome de reuniao do CI - Assina Reuniao do CI dia tal - com lista de presença


Observação - Não é uma alternativa a proposta de “quem quiser assina” porque isso não precisa de Conselho pra alguem assinar uma declaração. Trata-se de decisão colegiada da reunião.





ESPAÑOL 

Rita   on wsf ic whetsapp group 03.08

Mirando las diversas propuestas hechas para el consenso (A) y las decisiones del CI (B), tenemos esta lista de alternativas;



A - POSIBLES REGLAS PARA EL CONSENSO 


1 - El consenso sólo se adoptará por unanimidad

2 - La búsqueda de consenso será obligatoria por capas (¿hasta 3?) hasta su agotamiento, y el límite será la publicación del resultado, reservas y desacuerdos

3 - El consenso se establecerá por mayoría cualificada predefinida


Nota: No es una alternativa que una posición de obstrucción signifique el silenciamiento obligatorio del Consejo (al revés de la decisión mayoritaria). Los procesos de toma de decisiones deben hacerse públicos.


B - POSIBLES REGLAS PARA LAS POSICIONES DEL CONSEJO INTERNACIONAL 


1 - El CI nunca toma posiciones

2 - El CI toma posición en nombre del FSM - Firma FSM

3 - El CI asume una posición colegiada en representación del CI en su conjunto - Firma el CI

4 - El CI toma posición colegiada en nombre de la reunión del CI - Firma la Reunión del CI en ese día - con lista de asistencia


Observación - No es una alternativa la propuesta de “quien quiera firmar” porque esto no necesita asesoramiento para que alguien firme una declaración. Esta es una decisión colegiada de reunion.


….

FRANÇAIS

Rita   on wsf ic whetsapp group 03.08

En regardant les différentes propositions de consensus (A) et de décisions (B), nous avons cette liste de possibilités ;


A - RÈGLES POSSIBLES POUR LE CONSENSUS


1 - Le consensus ne sera adopté qu'à l'unanimité

2 - La recherche du consensus sera obligatoire par couches (jusqu'à 3 ?) jusqu'à son épuisement, et la limite sera la publication du résultat, les réserves et les désaccords

3 - Le consensus sera établi au moyen d'une majorité qualifiée prédéfinie


Remarque : Ce n'est pas une alternative qu'une position d'obstruction signifie le silence obligatoire du Conseil (l'inverse de la décision majoritaire). Les processus décisionnels doivent être rendus publics.


B - RÈGLES POSSIBLES POUR LES POSITIONS DU CONSEIL INTERNACIONAL 

1 - Le CI ne prend jamais position

2 - Le CI prend position au nom du FSM - Signe le FSM

3 - Le CI prend une position collégiale au nom du CI dans son ensemble - Signe le CI

4 - Le CI prend position collégialement au nom de la réunion du CI - Signe la réunion du CI ce jour - avec liste de présence


Observation - Il ne s'agit pas d'une alternative la proposition « qui veut signer » car cela n'a pas besoin de conseil pour que quelqu'un signe une déclaration. C'est une décision collégiale de reunion.