An approach (from Indian civil society with fairly broad CS backing) on
responding to the current crisis in Internet governance (post-Snowden.

 

M

 

Forwarded conversation
Subject: URGENT: Request for endorsing a civil society statement on
democratising Internet governance as input to UN Working Group
------------------------

From: Parminder <parminder...@itforchange.net>
Date: Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:28 PM
To: gurst...@gmail.com



 

Urgent !  IT for Change needs your endorsement to push progressive civil
society views into the UN Working Group that will make recommendations for
democratising global governance of the Internet.

Please circulate widely! 

Note that the last date to send your endorsement is 29th August

Dear Michael Gurstein,

Greetings from IT for Change!

You had participated in a campaign for 'democratising the global governance
of the Internet
<http://www.itforchange.net/civil_society_statement_on_democratic_internet>
'  in May 2012. Among other things, the joint letter signed by more than 60
organizations and many more individuals asked for setting up a UN Working
Group towards this objective. Such a Working Group was set up and has now
asked for public inputs to formulate its recommendations. 

In our joint letter, we had proposed some outlines for reforming the current
global governance architecture of the Internet. Time has come now to make
more clear and specific recommendations of the actual institutional
mechanism that we need. With most governments more worried about their
narrow geopolitical interests and relationships with individual countries,
it falls upon the civil society to be bold and forward looking and put
precise proposals on the table that can then be taken forward by state
actors. 

In a post-Snowden world, there is deep discomfort among almost all
countries, other than the US, with the manner in which the global Internet
is run and is evolving. The need for some global norms, principles, rules,
and necessary governance mechanisms for the global Internet is being felt
now as never before. The Internet can no longer remain anchored to the
political and business interests of one country, or to serving global
capital, as it is at present. As a global commons, it is our collective
democratic right and responsibility to participate in the governance of the
Internet, so that it can become a vehicle for greater prosperity, equity and
social justice for all.

We seek your support to join us in proposing the enclosed document as an
input to the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The Working Group has
sought public inputs through a questionnaire which can be seen at
http://unctad.org/en/Pages/CSTD.aspx . The most important question is at
number 8, which seeks input with regard to precise mechanism(s) that are
required. Our response will mostly address this all-important question. (You
are also encouraged to, separately, give a fuller response to the
questionnaire on your behalf or on behalf of your organization.) We will
also like to give wide media publicity to this civil society statement .

We will be glad if you can send your response to us before the 29th of
August. We are of course happy to respond to any clarification or additional
information that you may want to seek in the above regard. Please also
circulate this to others who you think may want to participate in this
initiative. The global Internet governance space seems to be dominated by
those who push for neoliberal models of governance. We must therefore have
as many voices heard as possible.

(The statement is also cut pasted below this email)

With best regard,

Parminder


Parminder Jeet Singh

  _____  

Executive Director
IT for Change
In special consultative status with the United Nations ECOSOC
www.ITforChange.net <http://www.itforchange.net/>  
T: 00-91-80-26654134 | T: 00-91-80-26536890 | Fax: 00-91-80-41461055

A civil society input to the UN Working Group looking at institutional
mechanisms for global governance of the Internet 

(Please reply to itfc <mailto:man...@itforchange.net> @itforchange.net
<mailto:man...@itforchange.net>  before 29th Aug if you will like to endorse
this statement) 

Why global governance of the Internet?

Internet governance is seen largely in terms of national sovereignty and
security or as pertaining to free speech and privacy. We are of the view
that there exist many other equally important issues for global Internet
governance that arise from the whole gamut of rights and aspirations of
people - social, economic, cultural, political and developmental. The
relationship of the global Internet to cultural diversity is one example.
The Internet increasingly determines not only the global flows of
information but also of cultures, and their commodification. No social
process is exempt from the influence of the Internet - from education to
health and governance. Social systems at national and local levels are being
transformed under the influence of the global Internet.

Instead of decentralizing power, the current structure of the global
Internet tends to centralize control in the hands of a small number of
companies. Some of these companies have near-monopoly power over key areas
of economic and social significance. Therefore, regulation of global
Internet business through pertinent competition law, consumer law, open
interoperability standards, etc, is becoming a pressing need. Increasing
statist controls need to be similarly resisted. With the emergent paradigm
of cloud computing presenting the looming prospect of remote management of
our digital lives from different 'power centres' across the world, it is
inconceivable that we can do without appropriate democratic governance of
the global Internet. Post-Snowden, as many countries have begun to
contemplate and even embark upon measures for 'digital sovereignty', the
only way to preserve a global Internet is through formulating appropriate
global norms, principles and rules that will underpin its governance. 

Background of this civil society input

A group of over 60 civil society organizations and several individuals, made
a statement on 'Democratizing the global governance of the Internet
<http://www.itforchange.net/civil_society_statement_on_democratic_internet>
' to the open consultations on 'enhanced cooperation'1 called by the Chair
of the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) on May
18th, 2012, in Geneva. The statement inter alia sought the setting up of a
CSTD Working Group to address this issue. We are happy to note that such a
Working Group has been set up and has now called for public inputs to make
its recommendations. This document is an input to the Working Group on
Enhanced Cooperation (WGEC) on the behalf of the undersigned . 

In the aforementioned statement of May 2012, the civil society signatories
had called for the following institutional developments to take place in the
global Internet governance architecture:

Our demands with respect to 'global' Internet Governance espouse a simple
and obvious democratic logic. On the technical governance side, the
oversight of the Internet's critical technical and logical infrastructure,
at present with the US government, should be transferred to an appropriate,
democratic and participative, multi-lateral body, without disturbing the
existing distributed architecture of technical governance of the Internet in
any significant way. (However, improvements in the technical governance
systems are certainly needed.) On the side of larger Internet related public
policy-making on global social, economic, cultural and political issues, the
OECD-based model of global policy making, as well as the default application
of US laws, should be replaced by a new UN-based democratic mechanism. Any
such new arrangement should be based on the principle of subsidiarity, and
be innovative in terms of its mandate, structure, and functions, to be
adequate to the unique requirements of global Internet governance. It must
be fully participative of all stakeholders, promoting the democratic and
innovative potential of the Internet. 

As the WGEC deliberates on concrete ways to move forward, the time is ripe
to propose clear and specific institutional mechanisms for democratizing the
global governance of the Internet. We have, therefore, expanded the above
demands into specific mechanisms that should be set in place for this
purpose. 

New global governance mechanisms are needed

We are of the view that it would be useful to have two distinct mechanisms -
one that looks at the global Internet-related public policy issues in
various social, economic, cultural and political domains, and another that
should undertake oversight of the technical and operational functions
related to the Internet (thus replacing the current unilateral oversight of
the ICANN2 by the US government). This will require setting up appropriate
new global governance bodies as well as a framework of international law to
facilitate their work, as follows.

A new UN body for Internet-related public policy issues: An anchor global
institution for taking up and addressing various public policy issues
pertaining to the Internet in an ongoing manner is urgently required. It can
be a committee attached to the UN General Assembly or a more elaborate and
relatively autonomous set up linked loosely to the UN (as a specialized UN
body). It should have a very strong and institutionalized public
consultative mechanism, in the form of stakeholder advisory groups that are
selected through formal processes by different stakeholder constituencies,
ensuring adequate representativeness. (OECD's
<http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/18/39/37328586.pdf> Committee on Computer,
Information and Communication Policy and India's recent proposal for a
<http://itforchange.net/Techgovernance/IndiaCIRP> UN
<http://itforchange.net/Techgovernance/IndiaCIRP>
<http://itforchange.net/Techgovernance/IndiaCIRP> Committee on
Internet-related Policies  <http://itforchange.net/Techgovernance/IndiaCIRP>
are two useful, and somewhat similar, models that can be looked at.)

This 'new body' will stay abreast of global Internet-related issues; where
necessary, develop international level public policies in the concerned
areas; seek appropriate harmonization of national level policies, and;
facilitate the required treaties, conventions and agreements. It will also
have necessary means to undertake studies and present analyses in different
policy areas. 

A new 'Internet Technical Oversight Board': This board will replace the
oversight role over the organizations undertaking technical and operational
functions that is currently performed by the US government in a unilateral
manner. The membership of this oversight board can be of a techno-political
nature, i.e. consisting of people with specialized expertise but who also
have appropriate political backing, ascertained through a democratic
process. For instance, the board can be made of 10/15 members, with 2/3
members each from five geographic regions (as understood in the UN system).
These members can perhaps be selected through an appropriate process by the
relevant technical standards bodies and/or country domain name bodies of all
the countries of the respective region. (Other mechanisms for constituting
the techno-political membership of this board can also be considered.)

The Internet technical oversight board will ensure that the various
technical and operational functions related to the global Internet are
undertaken by the relevant organizations as per international law and public
policy principles developed by the concerned international bodies. For this
oversight board to be able to fulfill its mandate, ICANN must become an
international organization with a host country agreement with the US
government (if ICANN has to continue to be headquartered in the US). It
should have full immunity from US law and executive authority, and be guided
solely by international law. Supervision of the authoritative root zone
server must also be transferred to this oversight broad. The board can
exercise this role with the help of an internationalized ICANN. 

Framework Convention on the Internet: An appropriate international legal
framework will be required sooner than later for the above bodies to
function properly. Accordingly, one of the early tasks of the proposed 'new
body' dealing with Internet-related public policy issues, discussed above,
will be to help negotiate a 'Framework Convention on the Internet' (somewhat
like the Framework Convention on Climate Change'
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Framework_Convention_on_Climate
_Change> ). Governance of the Internet concerns different kinds of issues
that are ever-evolving. It is, therefore, preferable to formulate an
enabling legal structure as a 'framework convention' rather than as a
specific treaty or convention that addresses only a bounded set of issues.
It may also be easier to initially agree to a series of principles,
protocols and processes that can then enable further agreements, treaties
etc on more specific issues. 

Such a Framework Convention will thus enable appropriate and ongoing global
policy responses to various opportunities and challenges that the
fast-evolving phenomenon of the Internet throws up. It will also formalize
the basic architecture of the global governance of the Internet; inter alia
recognizing and legitimizing the role and functions of the various bodies
currently involved with managing the technical and logical infrastructure of
the Internet, including the ICANN, Regional Internet Registries, Internet
technical standards bodies and so on. 

Appropriate mechanisms for crisis response and dispute resolution in
relation to the global Internet, and the social activity dependent on it
will also be required to be set up.

Relationship with the IGF

The UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF) was established as a multistakeholder
'policy dialogue forum' by the World Summit on the Information Society. The
proposed global Internet policy mechanism, especially the new UN based body,
will maintain a close relationship with the IGF. IGF affords a very new kind
of participative mechanism for policy making, whereby the participation
realm is institutionalized, and relatively independent of the policy making
structures. The IGF should preferably pre-discuss issues that are taken up
by this new policy body and present diverse perspectives for its
consideration. A good part of the agenda for this new body can emerge from
the IGF. Whenever possible, draft proposals to be adopted by this new body
should be shared with the IGF. 

To perform such a participation enhancing role, the IGF must be adequately
strengthened and reformed, especially to address the dominance of Northern
corporatist interests in its current working. It must be supported with
public funds, and insulated from any funding system that can bring in
perverse influences on its agenda and outcomes. Other required processes
must also be put in place to ensure that the IGF indeed brings in
constituencies that are typically under-represented, rather than provide
further political clout to the already dominant. 

Funding

An innovative way to fund the proposed new global Internet policy mechanism,
and also the IGF, is to tap into the collections made by the relevant bodies
from allocation of names and numbers resources pertaining to the global
Internet (like the fee that ICANN collects annually from each domain name
owner). These accruals now run into millions of dollars every year and could
be adequate to fund a large part of the needed mechanism for democratic
governance of the global Internet. 

In the end, we may add that there is nothing really very novel in the above
proposal for setting up new mechanisms for global governance of the
Internet. Similar models, for instance, were proposed in the report of the
Working Group on Internet Governance that was set up during the World Summit
on the Information Society, back in 2004. 

We hope that the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation will fulfill its high
mandate to lead the world towards the path of democratic governance of the
global commons of the Internet. 

1The outcome documents of the World Summit on the Information Society, held
in 2005, employed this as a placeholder term giving the mandate for further
exploration of the necessary mechanisms for global governance of the
Internet. 

2Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the US based
non-profit that manages much of technical and logical infrastructural
functions related to the Internet. 






 


----------
From: Parminder <parminder...@itforchange.net>
Date: Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 7:16 PM
To: gurst...@gmail.com



Apologies for having enclosed an early draft version of the statement.
Correct version is now enclosed.... thanks

 

 

-- 
Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. 
Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Reply via email to