[WSF-Discuss] Fwd: [DEBATE] : (Fwd) Cosatu crits WSF for Morocco venue
Jai Sen
jai.sen at cacim.net
Wed Mar 25 03:54:37 UCT 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
On March 22 2009, Madhuresh of CACIM posted the text of a letter from
COSATU (Congress of South African Trade Unions) to Members of the
Liaison Group appointed by the WSF’s International Council, dated
March 17 2009 (forwarded from the Debate list, and titled ‘Cosatu
crits WSF for Morocco venue’).
Here, in the lower part of this message, is a follow-up message
posted on Debate by Dominic Tweedie, and immediately below (and above
Dominic Tweedie’s message), is Peter Waterman’s response.
I am posting this firstly because I assume that most people on
WSFDiscuss would be interested in seeing this.
But this post is also to ask people on this list for any information
you have with respect to Peter Waterman’s point 4 :
4. I am not aware of any legal status of the WSF anywhere.
I have done a posting on the Debate list about the
situation in India (yes, there is a legal body, a ‘WSF India Trust’,
but interestingly, in theory and so far in practice, it is only for
receiving funds and there is another non-registered organisation that
runs the WSF in India, the WSF India Working Committee).
Would others please post here whatever information you
have on the legal status of the WSF anywhere in the world ?
Beyond this, and for the information of all those interested, these
two postings on Debate have then been followed by a fairly
substantial exchange on that list. I assume that Debate must have
some kind of archive that you can tap into in case you are interested
in seeing this exchange. Write and ask Patrick Bond, the list
administrator, at pbond at mail.ngo.za.
Jai
Begin forwarded message:
> From: peter waterman <p.waterman at inter.nl.net>
> Date: March 22 2009 4:48:44 PM GMT+05:30
> To: debate: SA discussion list <debate at debate.kabissa.org>, "nigd
> >> Network Institute for GD" <nigd at nigd.u-net.com>, Teivo Teivainen
> <teivo at nigd.org>, gina <ginavargas at telefonica.net.pe>
> Subject: Re: [DEBATE] : (Fwd) Cosatu crits WSF for Morocco venue
> Reply-To: "debate: SA discussion list " <debate at debate.kabissa.org>
>
> All good questions, D, which I will try to answer.
>
> Alternatively, you could put them to the companyeros from NIGD in
> Helsinki, to whom I am forwarding this (NIGD being a collective
> member of the IC). I am also forwarding to Teivo T, who has,
> additional to attending IC meetings, written a book about the WSF.
>
> Let me give you an opinion on these matters, or my impression, as
> someone in the large outer circle of the WSF (I have been at one IC
> meeting, have attended numerous WSF events, have written
> extensively about labour and the WSF, and co-edited a couple of
> compilations about and around the WSF).
>
> 1. Lines of accountability and responsibility are vague and
> variable. Thus COSATU is a member of the IC, but I do not know
> whether its representative reports back to COSATU or South African
> civil society more generally. The IC was self-created back around
> 2001, mostly on the initiative of Brazilians, including the CUT
> union confederation, and certain West European individuals/
> networks. It has expanded itself since then. It includes some
> active and some inactive members. It has created a number of sub-
> committees, and these either function well or are problematic. The
> same is true for individual sub-committee members who take on
> responsibilities. There have been complaints from beyond this inner
> circle about the functioning of the IC. At the Belem WSF, Jan-Feb
> this year, I think two prominent activist-intellectual supporters,
> Boaventura de Sousa Santos and Walden Bello, called for a
> transformation of this ad hoc IC, for - actually - something with
> more accountability and responsibility.
>
> 2. Formally, there is no leader and the leadership rests with the
> IC. However, no one speaks 'for the WSF' and IC members may have -
> for example - quite different relations with the state or inter-
> state bodies outside the IC. In practice there are maybe 10-20
> prominent activists, known and respected internationally because of
> their organisational qualities and/or writings. My impression is
> that the core activists have been Brazilians, with a background in
> struggles against the military regime, members of or sympathetic to
> the now-governing PT (Workers' Party). Some come from major
> organisations, like the CUT, others from such NGOs as IBASE.
>
> 3. I don't think anyone would recognise or call themselves an
> 'office bearer' of the WSF or IC. But there are numerous people who
> carry out tasks, and numerous sub-committees (or networks) that
> address themselves to, for example, expansion of the WSF or
> communication (a continuing problem within and for the IC). There
> are also regional structures by continent, and there is an
> Organisation Committee for each 'edition' of the WSF, largely
> consisting of nationals of the country concerned.
>
> 4. I am not aware of any legal status of the WSF anywhere.
>
> 5. Well the IC and OC do decide on the programme and functioning of
> each WSF 'edition'. Increasingly, and under pressure from
> participants and commentators, they have tended to provide a
> framework within which 'self-organised' activities predominate.
> There is no official WSF or IC publication. Until Belem, I believe,
> there has been a daily forum newspaper in several languages, 'Terra
> Viva', but this service was provided by the Rome-based IPS news
> agency. I believe that, in Belem, it produced only one, fat, issue.
>
> 6. The WSF has experimented with various websites over the years.
> There is always one for registration and the consequent planning/
> programming of the WSF event in question. There are, further,
> numerous websites that relate to the WSF but that are independent
> of the IC. I believe the Communications Committee is still
> struggling with this problem.
>
> 7. There is always a large media presence - from the dominant and
> alternative media - and increasing media facilities, at the WSF. I
> assume that there is someone in charge of any such facility. I am
> not aware of there being a permanent liaison office. And there is
> no official spokesperson. The WSF IC is, shy of any such authority
> being vested in one person.
>
> 8. Most WSF funding comes from the Oxfams and other such friendly -
> mostly development-oriented - foundations. At one time the Ford
> Foundation was a prominent funder. Funding is no secret and there
> was a report on the funding problem around 2005, available online.
> Other funding has come, for example, from the Government of Brazil,
> from state-owned corporations, and I assume that much funding or
> support in-kind was provided this year by the State of Para. There
> is also an accounting procedure, I believe, after each event. And
> debits have been announced, to my recollection, after both the
> Nairobi WSF 2007 and the Malmo ESF 2008. I myself await, however, a
> serious political-economic study/report on the WSF (most such
> reports - and they are legion - are political/institutional/
> cultural in nature).
>
> 9. If it is the case that a decision has been taken on siting the
> next WSF in Morocco, this must have been done by an IC of which
> COSATU has been a prominent member and, I believe, a regular
> participant. So the question of whether the IC or COSATU (or some
> sub-committee) screwed up here remains, for me, to be established.
> Whether, again, the decision (if taken) is an 'affront to the whole
> continent of Africa' remains likewise problematic. Certainly it has
> not been imposed from outside the continent. The desire to hold the
> next WSF in Africa has, I believe, been urged on the IC by its
> African members and, I assume, its regional sub-committee. So, once
> again, the question should be addressed here also. I actually agree
> with COSATU that Morocco should be ruled out. Even if it can be
> claimed that the Moroccan partners of the WSF are not the state but
> civil society, it would seem unlikely that the state would allow
> open solidarity actions there with the people of Western Sahara. As
> for your last question: no one within the WSF or its outer circle
> of support wants to split the WSF. Someone or maybe some parties
> have screwed up big time. (I think they also screwed up in holding
> the last WSF in Nairobi. Here a whole series of contradictions came
> to a head. But it is not easy to find a suitable site in Africa
> right now).
>
> 10. (Not an answer but a statement). The whole structure,
> procedures, contents and history of the WSF is open to continual
> question and challenge. This is, in fact, invited, and welcomed.
> Indeed it is considered normal and necessary. Born under the sign
> of the new social movements and socially-committed NGOs, the
> achievements and survival of the WSF is something of a miracle. It
> has been a miracle of organisation and improvisation, operating
> with a considerable horizontality, participation, innovation and
> inspiration. The innovation, compared with the Communist-organised,
> state-controlled, World Youth Festivals (still frozen into Cold War
> discourse), or those of the Catholic Church, demonstrates today
> significant outlines of that other world called for in the
> brilliant slogan, 'Another World is Possible'. This slogan implies
> also, of course, that 'Another World Social Forum' or 'Another Type
> of World Social Forum' is also possible. Me, I think the WSF idea
> has to sharpen its anti-capitalist profile (it could decline into
> an instrument of global neo-Keynesianism), to go more local and to
> go more cyberspatial.
>
> Hoping that better-qualified others will better respond to your
> questions,
>
> Peter W.
>
> PS. I have a forthcoming report, concentrating on labour at Belem,
> but which deals with some of the more general questions surrounding
> the WSF. Maybe next week. It will be posted on or linked to the
> Debate site (it has footnotes!).
>
> Dominic Tweedie wrote:
>> Please, comrades, answer some questions about the World Social Forum
>> (WSF), and help me respond to these kinds of questions.
>>
>> What are the lines of accountability and responsibility in the WSF?
>>
>> Who are the leaders? Who are the equivalent people to "office-
>> bearers"
>> in the ANC, COSATU or the SACP?
>>
>> Does it have any legal corporate existence in any country or
>> countires?
>>
>> Is executive power confined to the arrangement of meetings? Or are
>> there publications? What publications are there?
>>
>> Does the WSF have a web site?
>>
>> Does the WSF have a media liaison officer or a spokesperson? If
>> so, who is it?
>>
>> Assuming the WSF gets money from donors, who are they? How much money
>> does each one give? Through what entities it is held and spent?
>>
>> Morocco's current status is that it is expelled from the AU. Meeting
>> in Morocco is an affront to the entire continent of Africa. Anybody
>> who takes part is compromised. Those who as a consequence do not go
>> will not have a voice. If somebody had wished to contrive a
>> cold-war-style split in this body, this would have been an obvious
>> way
>> to do it. Who wants to split the WSF and why?
>>
>> With thanks and best wishes,
>>
>> Domza, VC
>> _______________________________________________
>> DEBATE mailing list
>> DEBATE at debate.kabissa.org
>> http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
>>
>>
>>
______________________________
Jai Sen
jai.sen at cacim.net
CACIM, A-3 Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024, India
www.cacim.net
Ph : +91-11-4155 1521, +91-98189 11325 - PLEASE NOTE NEW SECOND NUMBER !
Check out the OpenSpaceForum @ www.openspaceforum.net
Subscribe to WSFDiscuss, an open and unmoderated forum on the World
Social Forum and on related social and political movements and
issues. Simply send an empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-
subscribe at openspaceforum.net
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
Note : In case you are having problems opening any Word attachments I
have sent you here, you could try one of the following : (a) Put your
cursor on the icon, do a right click, see ‘Open With’, and open with
Word…; or (b), try saving the document onto your desktop or hard
disc, and then opening it. With apologies in advance if this advice
seems to question your technological literacy…
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net/attachments/20090325/231de00d/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the WorldSocialForum-Discuss
mailing list