(Moderator note: This is in response to Acting AIDS Sociaty of Asia Pacific
(ASAP) president's message about the issues related to the management of the 7th
International Conference on AIDS in Asia Pacific (7th ICAAP) to be held in Kobe-
Japan in July 2005)

Hi to AIDS ASIA readers,

I have read the Acting President of ASAP's response to concerns and if I was
teaching english I would use it in my clear thinking and writing classes as it
is a doozy of an example.

With all due respect KOBE AIDS conference organizers, they have had 4 years to
get this right and it behoves them to make sure this time that they know what
they are doing and how to get it done.

I am still waiting to decide whether I will attend.

I am of the view that the key stakeholder is the appointed nation and they
should handle it all. I am reminded of course of conversations with non
stakeholder organisations in Japan who were not consulted about the abandonment
of the last date and wonder about the transparency of the structures in Japan
itself.

Abstracts should be forwarded if people have anything to contribute. My concern
is that the best abstracts will probably come from the agencies who need
sponsorship to attend and present their findings. I was not encouraged by the
time lines for sponsorship decisions and I know from other conferences that if
abstracts are accepted and the authors not funded to attend as presenters it is
a waste of time and space in the display halls.

If an abstract is good enough to be accepted and the author cannot attend
without sponsorship then a decision should be made there and then as to the
level of sponsorship available and a specific offer made. There is nothing
worse that accepting an abstract and then asking people to find their own
sponsors to attend.

I have even had site managers threatened with demotion if they persisted in
making local spnsorship requests of their local UNAIDS office when clearly
decisions had already been made about who was going to have a free ride and
accommodation and I have to say the successful atenders were about as useful as
a bucket under a bull.

Kobe- 7th ICAAP conference organizers, you are on notice to perform and perform
well.

That is to make it as representative as possible and as easy as possible to
register.

This has to include a response email address which will be personally and
promptly attended by people who know enough to satisfy the respondents queries
for anyone seeking advice or assistance.

Geoffrey
E-mail: <gheaviside@...>
____________________________

Re: ICAAP information and the roles of Sponsors?
Ms Marina Mahathir, Malaysia
*********

To All Participants of the SEA-AIDS Forum,

The AIDS Society of Asia and the Pacific (ASAP) is posting this notice on
the SEA-AIDS eForum in response to a discussion raised by Dr Tim France on
26 January 2005.

The discussion centres around two main issues in need of clarifying, being:

rectification of the difficulties experienced with respect to the 7th
ICAAP on-line abstract system; and,

the level of responsiveness by key stakeholders in the organisation of
the 7th ICAAP.

In respect to the first issue, ASAP agrees with Dr France’s initial
comments in which he confirmed that, in response to several urgent messages
relating to difficulties in registering through the on-line system,
“received a response from the Local Organisers (posted to SEA-AIDS early
last week)”, and expressed his gratefulness, “for that acknowledgement and
solution to the problems…”. ASAP wishes to join with Dr France in thanking
the Japanese Local Organising Committee (JLOC) in Kobe for resolving the
problem as swiftly as possible.

The second main issue raised was that “ICAAP sponsors and co-sponsors”, of
which eight organisations were identified, have “some responsibility (and
opportunity) to provide reassurances that the problems were being heard and
addressed”. The concerns arising here appear to stem from a common
misunderstanding of the correct and agreed processes for administering the
organisation of ICAAP. It certainly does not include the airing of
individual views of each of the organisations listed. Rather, the primary
onus falls upon the JLOC who, as reiterated above, provided a solution to
the problem. I should also point out that from the date upon which the
difficulties were first cited daily communications between ASAP, JLOC and
members of the International Advisory Committee were despatched with a view
to remedying the problem. Dr France was privy to most of these
communications. In addition, ASAP was advised as early as 6 January from
the JLOC that it had despatched an initial announcement to HDN for posting
on SEA-AIDS. That announcement, I believe, also advised that further
updates would be forthcoming. Accordingly, the JLOC demonstrated it had
begun a process of remedying the problem, including the provision of
information to the public, both through the SEA-AIDS forum and the ICAAP
website early in January 2005.

It is important to realise that each of the organisations mentioned are
working to support a successful ICAAP. ASAP recognises the importance of
communities accessing accurate information expeditiously. ASAP also
acknowledges that the SEA-AIDS forum is one of several media available for
such distribution. However, it is also important for all members of all
communities to understand that, given the limited resources available to
many civil society organisations, the processes set in train to remedy
matters must be adhered to in order to achieve a successful ICAAP.

We hope that the above provides a suitable response to the concerns raised
by Dr France.

Yours sincerely,
Ms Marina Mahathir
Acting President
AIDS Society of Asia and the Pacific
Email: netra@...