AW: AW: [governance] UN General Assembly 2009 FYI

Sat Dec 19 09:03:44 EST 2009

Here are three other interesting paragrpahs (in the preamble) which also show the differences between the two drafts and point into an interesting positive (for the IGF future) direction.

The new insert which says, summerizing the Sharm el Sheikh debate "which generally welcomed the renewal of iuts manadte and recognozed the need for further discussion in improvement of its worling methods" opens the door for a new thread beyond 2010. 

Wolfgang

. 

Version December 4:
Recognizing the importance of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum as a multi-stakeholder forum for dialogue in which various matters are discussed, including, inter alia, public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance with a view to fostering the sustainability, robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet, and reiterating that all Governments, on an equal footing, should fulfil their roles and responsibilities, which encompass international Internet governance and ensuring the stability, security and continuity of the Internet, but not the day-to-day technical and operational matters, which do not impact on international public policy issues,

Taking note of the discussions at the fourth meeting of the Internet Governance Forum held in Sharm-el-Sheik, Egypt, from 15 to 18 November 2009 on the future of the Forum, which generally welcomed the renewal of its mandate and recognized the need for further discussion on improvement of its working methods, 

Recalling the first, second, third and fourth meetings of the Internet Governance Forum, held in Athens in October and November 2006, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in November 2007, in Hyderabad, India, in December 2008, and in Sharm-el-Sheikh, Egypt, in November 2009, respectively, and welcoming theconvening of the fifth meeting of the Forum, to be held in Vilnius in 2010,

Version November 5:

Recognizing the importance of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum in the discussion of public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet,

Recalling paragraphs 69 and 71 of the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, adopted by the World Summit on the Information Society on 18 November 2005,4 on the process of enhanced cooperation to enable governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet,

Recalling also the first to fourth meetings of the Internet Governance Forum, held in Athens from 30 October to 2 November 2006, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from 12 to 15 November 2007, in Hyderabad, India, from 3 to 6 December 2008, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, from 15 to 18 November 2009, respectively, and welcoming the convening of the fifth meeting of the Forum in Vilnius in 2010,

Best wishes and happy holidays

wolfgang

________________________________

Von: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch]
Gesendet: Sa 19.12.2009 10:23
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter at mail.uni-halle.de; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang
Cc: de la Chapelle, Bertrand
Betreff: Re: AW: [governance] UN General Assembly 2009 FYI

Hi

Thanks for the useful pointer, Wolfgang.  Some great stuff here, even a resolution on the NIEO!   Then it was off to the Palm for a nice lunch, presumably...

Anyway, I notice that A/C.2/64/L.62 of 5 November, from the G77 and China, was withdrawn.  Inter alia, it

14. Requests the Secretary-General to consider providing from the regular budget the necessary support to ensure the sustainability of the core activities and operations of the secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum, in order to carry out its programme of activities in accordance with its mandate;

However, A/C.2/64/L.62 of 4 December, from the Vice-Chairperson of the Committee, was adopted on 9 December.  Inter alia it

17. Encourages Member States, the private sector and all other relevant stakeholders to consider strengthening the secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum in order to support its activities and operations, in accordance with its mandate, including by providing additional funds, where possible, to the Trust Fund in support of the secretariat;

So I guess the concept remains voluntary contributions rather than regular budget.  In addition, the doc

15. Invites the Economic and Social Council to consider the report of the Secretary-General on enhanced cooperation on public policy issues pertaining to the Internet;

I'm not sure what to make of this one.  When the EC report was originally submitted during last year's CSTD there were objections and hence no formal consideration due in particular to the ITU uber alles language.  So are we to conclude that such objections have been withdrawn?  Anyone know what the deal is here?  Bertrand?

Thanks,

Bill

PS: For those who've not read the SG report, here's some of the ITU's recommendations (which pale in comparison to what's been proposed within ITU):

The current Internet governance framework could be enhanced to ensure greater and
more active participation of Governments in the formulation of international public
policy for information and communications technologies. Measures taken could
ensure better cooperation between Governments and other stakeholders in the policy
formulation process...It should be noted that there already exist intergovernmental bodies under the
United Nations umbrella that have strong participation of Governments, the
experience and also the necessary mandate. An improved governance framework
could leverage such existing structures to enhance Government participation, rather
than attempting to create new ones. Also, caution must be exercised when
suggesting that the Internet Governance Forum could play a decision-making role or
provide oversight functions in Internet-related public policy issues.

An improved governance framework could be formed within which all countries
would have an equal say in Internet-related public policy issues and in the
management of critical Internet resources....An intergovernmental organization such as the International Telecommunication
Union (ITU) has the necessary mandate and hence could play a leading role in the
creation of such a governance structure. Resolution 102 of the 2006 ITU
Plenipotentiary Conference instructs the ITU.

The root signing authority is of critical importance to the security, stability and
reliability of the Internet. The role and functions related to policies governing the
harmonized and global coordination of such services for country-code top-level
domains (ccTLDs) must be assumed by a relevant intergovernmental body with
the mandate from Governments and the experience in providing such services so that
concerns and interests of sovereign States can be taken into account.
This delegation decision could be a result of coordination among all relevant
stakeholders, through discussions and debates at appropriate forums such as
intergovernmental council meetings.

A country would retain sole control over the management of its assigned ccTLD in
accordance with paragraph 63 of the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society
which states that countries should not be involved in decisions regarding another
country's ccTLD; and that their legitimate interests, as expressed and defined by
each country in diverse ways, regarding decisions affecting their ccTLDs, need to be
respected, upheld and addressed through a flexible and improved framework and
mechanism.The delegating body could retain an advisory role, if required, at the request of the
country concerned. Any difference that may arise between the two entities could be
resolved through an international/intergovernmental organization with the necessary
mandate.

On Dec 18, 2009, at 1:17 PM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:

> http://www.un.org/ga/second/64/proposals.shtml
>
> Sorry here is the link which works (you have to scroll down and to go to the various draft to fiond the two resolution which refer to the IGF and related IG issues.
>
> wolfgang
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
 Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
***********************************************************

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance