<div>Dear all, </div><div><br></div><div>As a follow up to the civil society letter to WCIT (<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1LiM3FfKF8Fgih7Um7v2vK20J2AigneGrgJ93YTbqLSM" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1LiM3FfKF8Fgih7Um7v2vK20J2AigneGrgJ93YTbqLSM</a>) that a number of organizations on this list have signed on to, civil society representatives in Dubai drafted a statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement. The text of the statement is pasted below.</div>
<p>This statement assesses the opportunities and challenges faced by civil society at WCIT and sets out shortcomings we would like to see addressed to achieve meaningful civil society participation at the ITU moving forward. It is meant to be complementary to other post-WCIT civil society statements that focus on the substance of the ITRs. </p>
<p>We would very much like to secure sign on from your organization. We feel that there is a strategic importance of having this communication with the ITU Secretariat on record as we look to future conversations/events. Though the timing is not ideal, we plan to publish this statement with the list of signatories and send a copy to the ITU on Monday. Therefore,<u> we request that you reply to this email by 0900 EST/1400 UTC on Monday, January 24 if you would like to sign on</u>. Like with the earlier letter, we will leave the statement open for sign on and update the list of signatories regularly. I will send out a publicly accessible link with the statement and list of signatories on Monday for people to post and circulate, but it would also be great to discuss ways to draw attention to this statement in the New Year.</p>
<p>Please let me know if you have any questions, and thank you for your attention to this. Warm wishes over the holidays.</p>
<p>Best regards,</p><p>Deborah </p>
<p><b><br></b></p><p><b>Civil Society statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement</b></p>
<p>December 21, 2012</p>
<p>Civil society is disappointed that the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) could not come to consensus in revising the International Telecommunications Regulations (ITRs). We understand, however, the serious concerns that a number of governments have expressed with regard to the potential impact of the new regulations.</p>
<p>As civil society stated in its Best Bits statement, a key criterion for ITRs should be that “any proposed revisions are confined to the traditional scope of the ITRs” and “where international regulation is required around technical issues [it] is limited to telecommunications networks and interoperability standards.” We regret that an Internet governance-related resolution has been included in the Final Acts of WCIT, despite assertions by many that WCIT was not about Internet governance. We are also concerned by the lack of clarity around the applicability of the treaty, which as defined could have unforeseen consequences for an open internet, and the lack of specificity in key terms, such as security, which may negatively impact the public’s rights to privacy and freedom of expression.</p>
<p>This said, civil society would like to acknowledge and thank those governments that opened their delegations to members of civil society and other stakeholder groups. This was a very important initial step in establishing a civil society voice in the proceedings and we trust that it signals a wider commitment to multi-stakeholder approaches in public policy development and decision-making on telecommunications and Internet-related matters. We trust that this openness and inclusive approach will continue and extend to upcoming ITU-related work and beyond, and we urge other governments to welcome and engage with civil society going forward.</p>
<p>As we communicated to ITU Secretary General Touré, we also commend the ITU on first steps towards greater transparency and openness with regard to access to and webcasting of plenary sessions and Committee 5 sessions, as well as soliciting public submissions. These initial steps enabled civil society to play a constructive, albeit limited, role at the WCIT.</p>
<p>However there remain serious limitations to engaging with the ITU. The substantive policy deliberations in working groups were neither webcast nor open to unaffiliated civil society. Further, while it is positive that the ITU opened the process to public comment, these comments were never part of the official record. We raised both of these challenges with the Secretary General, in writing and in person, and he committed to addressing these concerns and appealing to member states, as appropriate. Although the WCIT has concluded, we renew our request to have the public comments submitted as official ITU documents to capture these positions for the historical record.</p>
<p>We also raised the issue of the lack of any institutional mechanism for civil society participation at the ITU. While the participation of civil society representatives in government delegations benefits both the delegations and the WCIT’s deliberations as a whole, it cannot substitute for engagement with independent members of civil society. We will be following up on these important matters with the Secretary General and welcome his commitment to considering institutional remedies to this challenge.</p>
<p>Looking forward, civil society seeks to work with governments and other stakeholders around the globe towards an ever more inclusive and substantive multi-stakeholder engagement on telecommunications, Internet, and related matters. Much more needs to be done with regard to opening the ITU to greater genuine multi-stakeholder participation and in particular independent civil society participation - institutional change will need to occur and we will work with the ITU and other stakeholders to bring this about. These changes are vitally important and need to be addressed as soon as possible given the upcoming 2013 World Telecommunication Policy Forum, World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS+10) and 2014 ITU Plenipotentiary Conference.</p>
<p><b></b><br></p>
<p><b></b><br></p><div><br></div>-- <br><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font face="garamond, serif">Deborah Brown</font></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px">
<font face="garamond, serif">Policy Analyst</font></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font face="garamond, serif">Access | AccessNow.org</font></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px">
<font face="garamond, serif">E. <a href="mailto:deborah@accessnow.org" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank">deborah@accessnow.org</a></font></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px">
<font face="garamond, serif">S. deborah.l.brown</font></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font face="garamond, serif">T. deblebrown</font></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px">
<font face="garamond, serif">PGP 0x5EB4727D</font></div><br>