[governance] REVISED Notes from Under-Secretary-General Sha's

Fri Apr 9 19:43:05 EDT 2010

Dear Anriette,

I am tentatively planning to attend to the meeting.

Best,

Katitza

On 3/31/10 2:50 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
> Thanks very much for these notes, Thomas.
>
> I am fairly confident that the CSTD bureau will ask for the SG's report.
> And we should encourage them to.
>
> Who is plannning to attend, or participate remotely in the CSTD this
> year?
>
> APC plans to be there.
>
> Anriette
>
> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 09:21 +0200, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>    
>> Dear Thomas
>>
>> thanks very very much.
>>
>> wolfgang
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> Von: Thomas Lowenhaupt [mailto:toml at communisphere.com]
>> Gesendet: Mi 31.03.2010 08:41
>> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> Betreff: [governance] REVISED Notes from Under-Secretary-General Sha's briefing on IGF at UN New York March 30 2010
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry for this REVISED version but I noticed that several ellipses ... were
>> stripped from my earlier version.
>>
>> Internet Governance - IGF Briefing by Under-Secretary-General Sha at UN
>> March 30, 2010
>>
>> The briefing began at 3:15 PM at the new temporary building at UN
>> Headquarters in New York City. Under-Secretary- General for Economic and
>> Social Affairs Mr. Sha Zukang presided.
>>
>> Mr. Sha began with a statement about his early interest in Internet
>> Governance, stating that he was the first to bring up the subject of
>> Internet Governance at the U.N. Apparently responding to some suspicion
>> arising from his former position as China's Ambassador to the U.N., and the
>> controversies about China's oversight of that nation's Internet resources,
>> he stated that he spoke as a U.N. employee. He stated that China had no real
>> interest in this matter and was not even present in the hall. "They don't
>> care."
>>
>> He then read a six page statement, interspersed with personal observations.
>> I'll endeavor to transcribe from the written statement beginning after the
>> history on page 3, under the heading "How The Review Process Will Unfold."
>> After reading the statement Mr. Sha took statements from Yemen, EU, Egypt,
>> Sri Lanka, Canada, U.S., U.K., France, Norway, ICC and some concluding
>> statements by Mr. Sha.
>>
>> > From page 3 of the written statement [with my comments in brackets] -
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> How The Review Process Will Unfold
>>
>> When the IGF was created, it was given a lifespan of five years, after which
>> time Member States would review the desirability of its continuation. The
>> Secretary-General was asked to assist in this process by examining its
>> merits taking into account the views of its many participants. More
>> precisely, Member States, in paragraph 76 of the Tunis Agenda "ask the UN
>> Secretary General to examiner the desirability of the continuation of the
>> Forum, in formal consultation with Forum participants, within five years of
>> its creation, and to make recommendations to the UN Membership in this
>> regard." Those five years have now come to an end.
>>
>> The formal consultations were initiated by an online process...
>>
>> A total of 61 written submissions were received following these calls for
>> public comment, of which 40 responded to the online questionnaire.
>> Contributions were received from Governments... Comments were also received
>> from a number of individuals.
>>
>> In November 2009, I convened a formal consultation with IGF participants
>> during the fourth meeting of the Forum in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt. During the
>> consultation 47 speakers...
>>
>> Eight statements of participants who were not given a speaking time slot due
>> to time constraints were posted online. In addition, two statement were
>> submitted after the consultations.
>>
>> The total number of contributions over the six month consultation period
>> from July to December 2009 was thus 118.
>>
>> Paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda enumerates four groups of stakeholders and
>> describes, in broad terms, the role that each might play in Internet
>> governance. They are:
>>
>> 1. Governments;
>>
>> 2. The private sector;
>>
>> 3. Civic society;
>>
>> 4. Intergovernmental and other international organizations.
>>
>>
>>
>> Member States also recognized "the valuable contributions by the academic
>> and technical communities within those stakeholder groups...
>>
>> Here, Member States have been very clear. The WSIS Declaration of Principles
>> adopted during the first phase of the Summit express a commitment to
>> building an inclusive, people-centered and development-oriented Information
>> Society for all. The Tunis Agenda, adopted during the second phase,
>> reinforced this understanding by calling for the establishment of a platform
>> for multistakeholder dialogue, the IGF, where voices could be heard.
>>
>> What stakeholders have said
>>
>> [This section enumerated six areas where participants made suggestions.]
>>
>> Submission of the Recommendations of the Secretary-General
>>
>> It is in the spirit of inclusiveness that the recommendations of the
>> Secretary-General must be prepared , taking into account the opinions
>> expressed by all stakeholder groups in the consultations.
>>
>> Based on Paragraph 76 of the Tunis Agenda, the note will be transmitted to
>> the 65th session of the General Assembly for consideration under item 17 of
>> the provisional agenda on information and communication technology for
>> development.
>>
>> The General Assembly will decide on the issue of the consultation of the
>> IGF.
>>
>> Recently, some Member States have expressed the desire that the note of the
>> Secretary-General on continuation of the IGF be submitted to the CSTD for
>> consideration.
>>
>> As you know, the agenda and the programme of the work of the CSTD were
>> decided by ECOSOC in its decision 2009/219. The decision did not request
>> that the Commission review the continuation of the IGF. Nor was there any
>> subsequent request for the submission of the recommendations of the
>> Secretary-General to the CSTD.
>>
>> In the provisional annotated agenda and organization of work issued early
>> this month under the symbol E/CN.16/2010/1, the matter of the continuation
>> of the IGF was nowhere mentioned in the annotated agenda of the CSTD.
>>
>> While CSTD is scheduled to consider WSIS follow up, it will address the
>> broad issue of the assessment of the five-year progress made in the
>> implementation of WSIS.
>>
>> Without a specific request from the CSTD, as requested in the decision of
>> ECOSOC, DESA is proceeding with the preparation of the recommendations of
>> the /Secretary-General, with the documentation timeline for the General
>> Assembly. [Here he emphasized the need and difficulty of translating into
>> the UN's 6 languages.]
>>
>> The matter whether the CSTD will consider the recommendations of the
>> Secretary-General on the continuation of the IGF will therefore be a
>> decision by Member States.
>>
>> Regarding the note of the Secretary-General containing the recommendations
>> of the continuation of the IGF, UNDESA could circulate the note of the
>> Secretary-General during the 13th session of the CSTD in Geneva from 17-21
>> May. [Here Mr. Sha emphasized the use of the word "could."]
>>
>> However, since the Secretariat is preparing the note according to the
>> documentation timeline of the General Assembly, the note will be only in
>> unedited form in English only. The official document on six languages will
>> not be available before then. As you know, the advance text itself must go
>> through editing, translation and production processes.
>>
>> So the issue before us is two-fold - a decision by member states as to
>> whether the recommendations of the Secretary-General should be submitted
>> first to CSTD; whether Member States could proceed with consideration of the
>> recommendations in the advance unedited form and not in six official
>> languages.
>>
>> At any rate I would be pleased to send a representative to CSTD to share
>> whatever information we can on the substance of the SGs recommendations, if
>> invited.
>>
>> Let me conclude by repeating that this briefing serves to inform you about
>> the process for preparation of the SGs recommendation...
>>
>> Mr. Sha then took statements from several entities.
>>
>> Yemen - presented a "Statement on Behalf of the Group of 77 and China." (See
>> http://www.g77.org/doc/ on Group of 77) After a preamble it made 6 points,
>> which I paraphrase:
>>
>> 1. The issue is important and must be addressed at the General Assembly
>> regardless of other fora that might also discuss it.
>>
>> 2. G77 and China believe IGF should be reviewed every 2-3 years.
>>
>> 3. IGF should focus, among other areas, "on how to resolve significant
>> public policy issues such as the unilateral control of the critical Internet
>> resources..."
>>
>> 4. The IGF should move beyond advice and provide advice to intergovernmental
>> bodies.
>>
>> 5. LDC's should be more involved than in the past.
>>
>> 6. "the Tunis Agenda should be strictly followed, when reforming the IGF, so
>> as not to duplicate the work and mandates of other existing arrangements,
>> mechanisms, institutions or organizations." And the IGF should continue to
>> work under the auspices of the UN.
>>
>> EU- Offered strong support for another five years in its current form. The
>> CSTD should be directly involved in the process. They suggested that the
>> preliminary note's "could" be circulated status be changed to "will."
>>
>> Egypt - They subscribe to Group of 77 plus China. Supports continuation of
>> IGF but its working methods need to be revised. Needs more financial support
>> for LDCs. Paragraph 71 has not been followed.
>>
>> Sri Lanka - Support continuation of IGF.
>>
>> Canada - Supports IGF continuation.
>>
>> U.S. - Statement by Michael Snowden, Advisor, Economic and Social Affairs.
>> Appreciate effort put forward by Mr. Sha. Echo previous statement. IGF has
>> been valuable. They second the hope that an early version of the SGs notes
>> can be circulated prior to CSTD.
>>
>> U.K. - 60252 asked ECOSOC to work with CSTD. Would like copy circulated
>> prior to CSTD.
>>
>> Mr. Sha Comment - As long as the General Assembly membership agrees that an
>> English-only version may circulate, he will enable it. But there must be a
>> unanimous call for this.
>>
>> France - Agreed with G 77 and China and EU. Wants it for the CSTD meeting
>> but language is an issue. [Here Mr. Sha praised France.]
>>
>> Norway - Asked about paragraph 71. Staff had to check this and this process
>> was to be undertaken by Council of Europe, ICANN, IETF, OECD, WIPO, W3C. He
>> referred to a SG progress report in 2008.
>>
>> Mr. Sha noted that he follows the General Assembly:
>>
>> 193 members of General Assembly
>>
>> 54 members of ECOSOC
>>
>> 43 members of CSTD.
>>
>> ICC (International Chamber of Commerce - Supports continuation of IGF.
>>
>> Mr. Sha - CSTD can be helpful but it can't supplant the work of the General
>> Assembly. He needs a request from the CSTD, from the bureau [not sure which
>> that is] or an ad hoc group before he can release the draft SG note. He also
>> needs the non-English to say it is OK, or minimally not object. One
>> objection would probably stop him from releasing it.
>>
>> End of notes and comments. Tom Lowenhaupt. 2:06 AM. March 31, 2010.
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>      
>
>    

-- 
Katitza Rodriguez
International Rights Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
katitza at eff.org
katitza at datos-personales.org (personal email)

Please support EFF - Working to protect your digital rights and freedom of speech since 1990

____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t