WCIT Statement

[parminder]

IT for Change would like to sign it.


On Sunday 04 November 2012 05:01 PM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
> Dear all,
> The participants in Baku decided to incorporate small revisions 
> without re-opening the entire text.  Here's the final version:
>
> http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/wcit_statement
>
> Currently, we have 10 organizations that are signatories to it:
>
> Access (Brett Solomon)
> Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (AHM. Bazlur Rahman)
> Centre for Internet and Society (Pranesh Prakash)
> Center for Democracy & Technology
> Consumers International
> Electronic Frontier Finland (Tapani Tarvainen)
> Global Partners & Associates (Andrew Puddephatt)
> InternetNZ
> ONG Derechos Digitales (Claudio Ruiz)
> OpenMedia (Steve Anderson)
>
> As far as I can see, we have until the 7th before we close signatories 
> and endorsements.  (These two words are being used to distinguish 
> between those who participated in framing it and those who agree with 
> it.)
>
> Given that anyone can edit the document, if you are adding your 
> organization's name, I would request you to write your name in 
> parentheses.  We can decide later that we wish to remove names from 
> all organizations.
>
> Regards,
> Pranesh
>
> Pranesh Prakash wrote [2012-11-04 12:20]:
>> Dear all,
>> Here is the statement of civil society members and groups participating
>> in a pre-IGF meeting at Baku in 2012 as drafted after the morning
>> session on Sunday, November 4, 2012.
>>
>> Please indicate your and your group's support of this statement on this
>> mailing list or directly at the end of this Etherpad document:
>> <http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/wcit_statement>.
>>
>> Given our deliberation on these both yesterday and today — and the fact
>> that we would not wish to open this particular statement up to extensive
>> revision again — I would request people to raise comments on this
>> mailing list only if you believe the drafters have committed an
>> egregious mistake in capturing the agreement present in the room. Please
>> do not leave comments on the Etherpad document.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pranesh
>>
>> ====
>>
>> Statement of civil society members and groups participating in a pre-IGF
>> meeting at Baku in 2012.
>>
>> The process of the revision of the International Telecommunications
>> Regulations (ITRs) have not been sufficiently inclusive and transparent,
>> despite some recent efforts to facilitate some public participation.
>> Fundamental to the framing of public policy must be the pursuit of the
>> public interest and fundamental human rights, and we urge member states
>> to uphold and protect these values.
>>
>> We as civil society organizations wish to engage with the World
>> Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) process in this
>> spirit. Member-states, in most cases, have not held open, broad-based,
>> public consultations in the lead up to the WCIT, nor have they indicated
>> such process for the WCIT itself.
>>
>> In order to address this deficiency, and as a minimum, we would urge:
>> * All member states and regional groups to make their proposals
>> available to the public in sufficient time to allow for meaningful
>> public participation;
>> * All delegates to support proposals to open sessions of the WCIT
>> meeting to the public;
>> * The ITU Secretariat to increase transparency of the WCIT including
>> live webcast with the video, audio, and text transcripts, as far as
>> possible, to enable participation by all, including persons with
>> disabilities;
>> * The ITU Secretariat, member-states, and regional groups to make as
>> much documentation publicly available as possible on the ITU's website,
>> so that civil society can provide substantive input on proposals as they
>> are made available;
>> * Member-states to encourage and facilitate civil society participation
>> their national delegations;
>> * The ITU to create spaces during the WCIT for civil society to express
>> their views, as was done during the WSIS process.
>>
>> Given the uncertainty about the nature of final proposals that will be
>> presented, we urge delegates that the following criteria be applied to
>> any proposed revisions of the ITRs.
>>
>> * That any proposed revisions are confined to the traditional core
>> mandate of the ITU and scope of the ITRs, where international regulation
>> is required around technical issue limited to basic telecommunications
>> networks and interoperability standards.
>> * There should be no revisions to the ITRs that involve regulation of
>> the Internet Protocol and above.
>> * There should be no revisions that could have a negative impact on
>> affordable access to the Internet or the public's rights to privacy and
>> freedom of expression.
>>
>> More positively we call upon the ITU to promote principles of net
>> neutrality, open standards, affordable access and universal service, and
>> effective competition.
>>
>> Signed by:
>>
>> ====
>>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20121104/eb2bb9f3/attachment.htm>