[Chapter-delegates] Fwd: [governance] Notes from Under-Secretary-General Sha's briefing on IGF at UN New York March 30 2010

Wed Mar 31 01:17:19 PDT 2010

Christopher,
Greetings,

Thank you for sharing the valuable information, good to read of document,
keep us posted

Best Regards

On 31 March 2010 12:29, Christopher Wilkinson <cw at christopherwilkinson.eu>wrote:

> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>

-- 
Asif Kabani
Email: kabani.asif at gmail.com

“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge"
Sir William, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20100331/3864ac9b/attachment.htm>