[governance] Proposal for an IGF working group on EC

[AHM Bazlur Rahman]

*Dear Anriette,*
Greetings from Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC)
and Bangladesh IGF.

We fully support establishment of a multi-stakeholder
working group of the Internet Governance Forum aimed at enhanced
cooperation.

We wish grand success of establishment of a multi-stakeholder
working group of the Internet Governance Forum  form Bangladesh.

With best regards,


Bazlu
_______________________
AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR
Chief Executive Officer
Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC)
[NGO in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council]
&
Head, Community Radio Academy

House: 13/1, Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207  Bangladesh
Phone: +88-02-9130750, +88-02-9138501, Cell: +88 01711881647
Fax: 88-02-9138501-105,
E-mail: ceo at bnnrc.net, bnnr <bnnrc at bd.drik.net>cbd at gmail.com  www.bnnrc.net



On 16 May 2012 20:54, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:

> Hi all
>
> Attached (and below) is a statement and proposal on EC that we hope to
> discuss further, online, and then also in the CSTD consultation on
> enhanced cooperation on Friday 18 May here in Geneva. Note that this is
> not yet an official APC position. Members are still discussing it.
>
> Looking forward to your feedback.
>
> Anriette
>
>
> -----------------------------
>
> APC Policy Programme calls for the establishment of a multi-stakeholder
> working group of the Internet Governance Forum aimed at enhanced
> cooperation
>
> GENEVA, MAY 14 2012 - Cooperation in internet governance implies that
> all partners should, in their respective roles, work together on an
> equal footing and with a shared mission. The Association for Progressive
> Communications' Communication and Information Policy Programme (APC
> CIPP) thereby supports strengthening 'enhanced cooperation' to address
> global public policy issues pertaining to the internet, which will
> realise its potential only when forces are balanced.
>
> Structural differences exist between governments, the technical
> community the private sector and civil society - four stakeholder groups
> that make up the current internet governance ecosystem. APC is a civil
> society network that has not shied away from actively participating in
> the global policy dialogue and seven years after release of the Tunis
> Agenda still believes that internet governance should be ,participative,
> inclusive, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of
> governments, the private sector, civil society, the technical community
> and international organisations. This implies recognizing and curbing
> imbalances not only between stakeholders, but also within stakeholder
> entities.
>
> APC stresses the principle of democratic global governance of the
> internet. Building legitimacy of global internet-related policy spaces
> and mechanisms is a complex process that requires the acknowledgment of
> power dynamics, diverse interests and the political climate. Future
> internet governance mechanisms must engage stakeholders on an equal
> footing and ensure they are effectively represented.
>
> APC further requests that as a forum for multi-stakeholder dialogue on
> internet policy, established as an outcome of the World Summit on
> Information Society, the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) establish a
> multi-stakeholder working group on unresolved issues related to
> 'enhancing cooperation' in internet governance. The Tunis Agenda states
> very clearly that taking enhanced cooperation forward is central to the
> mandate given to the IGF.
>
> “71. The process towards enhanced cooperation, to be started by the UN
> Secretary-General, involving all relevant organizations by the end of
> the first quarter of 2006, will involve all stakeholders in their
> respective roles, will proceed as quickly as possible consistent with
> legal process, and will be responsive to innovation. Relevant
> organizations should commence a process towards enhanced cooperation
> involving all stakeholders, proceeding as quickly as possible and
> responsive to innovation. The same relevant organizations shall be
> requested to provide annual performance reports.
>
> “72. We ask the UN Secretary-General, in an open and inclusive process,
> to convene, by the second quarter of 2006, a meeting of the new forum
> for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue—called the Internet Governance
> Forum (IGF).”
>
> The text of the Tunis Agenda then continues to describe in greater
> detail what this open and inclusive process should achieve in order to
> forward enhanced cooperation, and, in paragraph 73 it proposes how this
> should be done:
> “73. The Internet Governance Forum, in its working and function, will be
> multilateral, multi-stakeholder, democratic and transparent. To that
> end, the proposed IGF could:
> a. Build on the existing structures of Internet governance, with special
> emphasis on the complementarity between all stakeholders involved in
> this process – governments, business entities, civil society and
> intergovernmental organizations.
> b. Have a lightweight and decentralized structure that would be subject
> to periodic review.
> c. Meet periodically, as required. IGF meetings, in principle, may be
> held in parallel with major relevant UN conferences, inter alia, to use
> logistical support1.“
> Participation and cooperation in internet governance has increased
> dramatically since 2005. It is important that these gains are not lost.
> As pointed out by Joy Liddicoat, coordinator of APC's Internet Rights
> are Human Rights project, there is particular value in “... the system
> of [internet governance] remaining dependent on the collection of
> individuals and organisations and the system of mutual recognition and
> cooperation which have ,so far, enabled the internet to function without
> significant problems. Such a system provides a compelling framework
> within which contests for control have sufficient counterweights to
> ensure no single person or organisation has total autonomy.”
>
> At the same time, many imbalances and constraints remain and new
> challenges are posed by the rapid development of the internet and its
> increased relevance as more people, particularly people who are excluded
> from social, economic and political power, gain access.
>
> Unresolved issues include real constraints for effective participation
> in internet governance decision-shaping and decision-making such as, but
> not exclusive to, financial resources, capacity, knowledge and
> understanding of issues and implications. These constraints do not apply
> only to civil society, but also to governments, the technical community
> and the private sector. They apply primarily, but not exclusively to
> stakeholders from developing countries.
>
> For cooperation between stakeholders in internet governance to be
> further enhanced, these imbalances need to be acknowledged, and
> addressed. They exist between countries: governments from North America
> and Europe are generally more engaged in IG, and have more influence;
> between companies, with large, globalised companies often being
> disproportionately influential as they are powerful in open processes in
> their own right, and through the influence they have on governments.
>
> Imbalances also exist in the participation of civil society in internet
> governance: within civil society (with only a small sub-section of civil
> society participating regularly), and, between civil society and
> governments as well as other non-governmental stakeholders such as
> business and the technical community.
>
> The Association for Progressive Communications sees 'enhanced
> cooperation' as a responsibility of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF).
> The advances towards a potential consensus among stakeholders that have
> been made since 2005 can and must evolve into concrete and sustainable
> mechanisms that facilitate not just multi-stakeholder participation, but
> also multi-stakeholder decision-making in internet governance.
>
> Based on our experience with global public policy issues pertaining to
> the internet, we are today in a position to say that we are not in
> favour of a new UN body to govern the Internet. This does not imply that
> we do not place great value on the UN system and the important role it
> plays in facilitating international cooperation. Nor do we subscribe to
> the manner in which governance of internet resources is currently being
> done. We are also unhappy with the degree to which current arrangements
> only partially implement a multi-stakeholder model. We believe that
> civil society and the citizens of the world will be best served by an
> internet governance setting that relies on 'enhanced cooperation' among
> equals. For these reasons we call on all stakeholders to renew and
> reinvigorate efforts to ensure existing mechanisms demonstrate enhanced
> cooperation and improved internet governance, and to explore the
> establishment of new mechanisms that can effectively deepen cooperation
> between all stakeholders.
>
> In our collective efforts to ensure that global governance of the
> internet relies on enhanced cooperation among equals, developing a set
> of principles and procedures to guide the way in which multi-stakeholder
> collaboration can practically translate into EC is necessary.
> Accordingly, APC proposes that an IGF working group on enhanced
> cooperation be established, drawing on the modalities used to constitute
> the Working Group on Internet Governance in the build-up to the second
> phase of the WSIS in Tunis. It should be multi-stakeholder with all
> stakeholders able to participate on an equal footing.
>
> We propose that the goal of this working group should be to develop a
> 'Multi-stakeholder Declaration on Enhanced Cooperation in Internet
> Governance' that, in line with the Tunis Agenda, captures consensus
> positions on basic principles, modalities for enhanced cooperation. It
> should also consider proceedings of the United Nations Human Right
> Council  in relation to the internet and human rights. This group can
> consider proposals for enhancing cooperation made in the last few years,
> such as, for example, the IBSA (India Brazil South Africa) and CIRP
> (Committee for Internet Related Policies) proposals as well as the
> proceedings of the General Assembly sessions that dealt with enhanced
> cooperation.
>
> APC recognises the importance of specifically underscoring one of the
> largest examples of existing imbalance in internet governance, as
> mentioned above: the geopolitical influence of the United States and
> Europe. However, the power of other forces and drivers (governmental and
> non-governmental) should not be underestimated. APC executive director
> Anriette Esterhuysen adds, “it would be a mistake to assume that
> shifting the current balance of geopolitical influence away from the US
> and Europe would guarantee that the public interest, as opposed to
> narrower business and government interests, will become the main driver
> for IG. It is also no guarantee for a stronger voice for civil society.”
>
> APC will continue working with a rights-based and public interest
> principles approach towards its vision of an internet that is governed
> by a clear set of guiding principles and procedures grounded in human
> rights declarations. This should be the concrete goal of 'enhanced
> cooperation' and this is certainly what APC will be actively pursuing.
>
> 16 May 2012
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This statement has been developed by the Association for Progressive
> Communications (APC) Communications and Information Policy Programme.
> The Association for Progressive Communications (APC) is an network and
> non-profit organisation founded in 1990 that wants everyone to have
> access to a free and open Internet to improve lives and create a more
> just world. www.apc.org
>
> END
>
> Context
> Tunis Agenda (WSIS, 2005)
> http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html
> Report of the Secretary-General : Enhanced cooperation on public policy
> issues pertaining to the Internet (UN Economic and Social Council, 2009)
>
> http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN-DPADM/UNPAN039046.pdf
> CSTD meeting on enhanced cooperation on public policy issues pertaining
> to the Internet (May 18 2012)
> http://www.unctad.org/en/Pages/MeetingDetails.aspx?meetingid=61
> APC Contribution to the UN CSTD five year review of progress concerning
> WSIS outcomes
> http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/APC_CSTDquestionnaire_WSISFollowUp.pdf
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director, association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120517/34480213/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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