<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<big><big><b><small><small>Interesting editorial on the IGF 2009:</small></small></b></big></big>
<h1><small><small>ENDitorial: IGF 2009: the Forum is the Message (and
the Massage as well)</small></small></h1>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number7.23/igf-2009-forum-is-the-message">http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number7.23/igf-2009-forum-is-the-message</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="nodedate">2 December, 2009 </div>
<p>Internet Governance Forum or Internet Governance Fair? One might
still
wonder what the IGF acronym stands for, after the closing of its fourth
annual meeting in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, on 18 November 2009. As
usual, the
IGF featured a number (111 over 4 days!) of so-called multi-stakeholder
panels and workshops, exhibition booths, launching events and other
happenings. One might still equally wonder what 'Internet Governance'
means
in the IGF context: apparently, any and all Internet issues, roughly
categorized under 7 headings: Access, Diversity, Openness, Security,
Critical Internet Resources, Development and Capacity Building.
</p>
<p>
The new comer finds it hard to understand the difference between
discussion
formats: main session (though run in parallel with up to 9 other
events),
workshop, open forum, best practice forum, dynamic coalition meeting:
what's
the exact difference in the end? The veteran is still waiting for the
'round-table' format, that is, a more output-oriented format for issues
that
have reached a certain level of maturity, that one would have expected
as a
result of the February and May 2009 IGF consultation meetings. But
'outcome'
seems a banned concept, if not a jinx, at IGF. Marshall McLuhan would
probably have liked it: the Forum is indeed the message and the massage
altogether. However, some participants have a precise agenda to advance
for
better or worse.
</p>
<p>
The Association for Progressive Communication (APC) took further steps
on
its joint initiative with the Council of Europe and UNECE towards a
"Code of
Good Practice on Transparency, Information and Participation in
Internet
governance", which builds on the principles of WSIS and the Aarhus
Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in
Decision-Making
and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. The Electronic Privacy
Information Center (EPIC) and the international Public Voice Coalition
were
instrumental in making privacy a key and crosscutting issue at this
year
IGF, most notably by moderating the main session on "security,
openness, and
privacy" and by convening high quality informative workshops to put
privacy
in focus in emerging contexts such as cloud computing, behavioural
targeting
and social networks. IGF was indeed the perfect opportunity for the
Public
Voice Coalition, of which EDRI is a main actor, to campaign on and
collect
more signatures to the recently adopted "Madrid Civil Society
Declaration on
Global Privacy Standards in a Global World".
</p>
<p>
On the worrying side, no less than 3 workshops were explicitly
dedicated to
the promotion of the Council of Europe (CoE) Convention on Cybercrime
through CoE (privately co-funded) projects. While these projects claim
to
include data protection and privacy in their objectives, this would
certainly be better achieved if the CoE (as well as private companies)
were
dedicating comparable resources to the promotion of the CoE Convention
108
for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing
of
Personal Data, together with its 2001 additional Protocol regarding
supervisory authorities and transborder data flows. Another
preoccupying
issue is the promotion by many governments, but also by other
stakeholders
including some NGOs, of regulations and public-private initiatives to
fight
the "dangers" of the Internet through content regulation measures that
have
shown, till now, more harm to human rights and especially the rights to
freedom of expression, to privacy and to access to knowledge, than
effective
protection of vulnerable groups.
</p>
<p>
Human rights are not simply a discussion topic: they form a set of
international state binding standards. Active campaigning and
uncompromising
on the softening and dilution of basic universal principles seems to be
still required from the civil society side. While APC and some other
participants seem to consider that human rights are gaining prominence
at
the IGF, it remains to be proven that, beyond endless discussions, the
realization of human rights in the digital environment is making
effective
progress thanks to the IGF... or even AT the IGF one should rather say:
during an event organized by the Open Net Initiative (ONI) to launch
the
book entitled "Access controlled", a promotion poster was taken down by
security personnel on the grounds that it showed the following
sentence:
'China's famous "Great Firewall of China" is one of the first national
Internet filtering systems', a display which was claimed to violate UN
policy.
</p>
<p>
Should the IGF continue, then? Almost all stakeholders, including civil
society ones, advocated in favour of the continuation of the IGF in the
written comments they submitted as well as at the main session
dedicated to
the desirability of the Forum continuation after the expiration of its
first
5-years mandate in 2010. Particularly and unanimously praised were the
capacity building feature of the IGF and its ability to facilitate open
dialogue among different stakeholders and different viewpoints.
Governments
are divided, though, on whether the IGF should lead to negotiated
and/or
binding outcomes: Canada, USA, and the EU presidency strongly stood
against
such idea, rather favouring IGF continuation in its current form.
Others, like Brazil, Kenya and Switzerland, advocated for more concrete
but not negotiated outcomes. China was the most clear and direct:
"without reform to the present IGF, it is not necessary to give the IGF
a five-year extension", advocating for a more classical UN style
discussion. All developing countries highlighted the need for better
inclusion and involvement of participants from the Global South. Since
the IGF will probably be continued, the fact that the IGF 2011 will be
held in Kenya might bring some improvement on this last issue. Next
year's IGF meeting will be in Vilnius, Lithuania, on 14-17 September
2010.
</p>
<p>
Internet Governance Forum, with workshops list and main sessions
transcript
(15-18.11.2009)<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.intgovforum.org">http://www.intgovforum.org</a>
</p>
<p>
APC's project for a code of good practice in Internet governance<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.apc.org/fr/projects/code-good-practice-internet-governance">http://www.apc.org/fr/projects/code-good-practice-internet-governance</a>
</p>
<p>
EPIC and The Public Voice workshops on Privacy (15-18.11.2009)<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thepublicvoice.org/events/egypt09/">http://thepublicvoice.org/events/egypt09/</a>
</p>
<p>
The Madrid Privacy Declaration (3.11.2009)<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/">http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/</a>
</p>
<p>
Council of Europe Projects on Cybercrime<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.coe.int/cybercrime">http://www.coe.int/cybercrime</a>
</p>
<p>
EDRi-gram: The 2001 Coe Cybercrime Conv. More Dangerous Than Ever
(20.07.2007)<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.12/cybercrime-convention-dangerous">http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.12/cybercrime-convention-dangerou...</a>
</p>
<p>
APC's assessment of IGF 2009 (26.11.2009)<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/APCIGF4Assessment_EN.pdf">http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/APCIGF4Assessment_EN.pdf</a>
</p>
<p>
ONI's poster taken down and related videos, including UN Statement on
the
incident (15.11.2009)<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-kxYt2LwKc">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-kxYt2LwKc</a>
</p>
<p>
(Contribution by Meryem Marzouki, EDRI-member IRIS - France)
</p>
</body>
</html>