[governance] new version of IG part in WSIS CS statement

[Ralf Bendrath]

Hi all,

since I did not get an agreed text from the caucus, I have tried to follow 
the discussions here. The current version is copied below. Please make my 
life a bit easier. ;-)

Ralf

Internet Governance

Civil society is pleased with the decision to create an Internet 
Governance Forum (IGF), which it has advocated since 2003. We also are 
pleased that the IGF will have sufficient scope to deal with the issues 
that we believe must be addressed, most notably the conformity of existing 
arrangements with the Geneva Principles, and other cross-cutting or 
multidimensional issues that cannot be optimally dealt with within those 
arrangements. However, we reiterate our concerns that the Forum must not 
be anchored in any existing specialized international organization, 
meaning that its legal form, finances, and professional staff should be 
independent. In addition, we reiterate our view that the forum should be 
more than a place for dialogue. As was recommended by the WGIG Report, it 
should also provide expert analysis, trend monitoring, and capacity 
building, including in close collaboration with external partners in the 
research community.

We are concerned, however, about the absence of details on how this forum 
will be created and on how it will be funded. We insist that the 
modalities of the IGF be determined in full cooperation with civil 
society. We emphasize that success in the forum, as in most areas of 
Internet governance, will be impossible without the full participation of 
civil society. By full participation we mean much more than playing a mere 
advisory role. Civil society must be able to participate fully and equally 
in both plenary and any working group or drafting group discussions, and 
must have the same opportunities as other stakeholders to influence 
agendas and outcomes.

The Tunis Agenda addressed the issue of political oversight of critical 
Internet resources. This, in itself, is an achievement. It is also 
important that governments recognized the need for the development of a 
set of Internet-related public policy principles that would frame 
political oversight of Internet resources. These principles must respect, 
protect and promote the civil and political rights protected by 
international human rights treaties, ensure equitable access to 
information and online opportunities for all, and promote development.

It is important that governments have established that developing these 
principles should be a shared responsibility. However, it is very 
unfortunate that the Tunis Agenda suggests that governments are only 
willing to share this role and responsibility among themselves, in 
cooperation with international organisations. Civil society remains 
strongly of the view that the formulation of appropriate and legitimate 
public policies pertaining to Internet governance requires the full and 
meaningful involvement of nongovernmental stakeholders.

With regard to paragraph 40 of the Tunis Agenda, we are disappointed that 
there is no mention that efforts to combat cybercrime need to be exercised 
in the context of checks and balances provided by fundamental human 
rights, particularly freedom of expression and privacy.

To ensure that Internet governance and development take place in the 
public interest, it is necessary for people who use the Internet 
understand how the DNS is functioning, how IP addresses are allocated, 
what basic legal instruments exist in fields like cyber-crime, 
Intellectual Property Rights, eCommerce, e-government, and human rights 
and promoting development. The responsibility of creating such awareness 
should be shared by everyone, including those at present involved in the 
governance and development of the Internet and emerging information and 
communication platforms.

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance