[Chapter-delegates] Fwd: [governance] Notes from Under-Secretary-General Sha's briefing on IGF at UN New York March 30 2010
Christopher Wilkinson
cw at christopherwilkinson.eu
Wed Mar 31 00:29:55 PDT 2010
FYI - CW
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Thomas Lowenhaupt" <toml at communisphere.com>
> Date: Wed 31 Mar 2010 08:22:52 GMT+02:00
> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: [governance] Notes from Under-Secretary-General Sha's
> briefing on IGF at UN New York March 30 2010
> Reply-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org,"Thomas Lowenhaupt" <toml at communisphere.com
> >
>
> 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 have 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/) 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 SG's 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 at
> the conclusion of the comments Mr. Sha stated that 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. To release the draft note he needs a request from
> the CSTD, from the bureau [not sure which that is] or an ad hoc
> group. He also needs the non-English to say it is OK, or minimally
> not object. One objection would stop him from releasing the draft SG
> note.
>
> End of notes and comments by Tom Lowenhaupt, 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20100331/4d4610f6/attachment.htm>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list