Dear All, We prepared the notes of the 1st WSIS+20 Preparatory Meeting and Stocktaking Session that took place on 30 May 2025. Please find attached. Alexey Trepykhalin Government and IGO Engagement Manager ICANN/GE 1st Preparatory Meeting & Stocktaking Session - 30 May 2025<https://publicadministration.desa.un.org/wsis20/1stPreparatoryMeetingStockta...> The First Preparatory Meeting and Stocktaking Session for WSIS+20 overall review by the United Nations General Assembly took place at U.N. HQ on 30 May 2025. NOTES The Kenyan co-facilitator said that the consultation will “serve two key purposes”: · “to hear the expectations” of the member states “on the scope and priorities of the WSIS+20 outcome document and · “to gather inputs that will inform the development of the elements paper.” He also stressed that this process “is fully grounded in UNGA resolution 79/277<https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/79/277> which re-affirms the leadership of member-states while encouraging the meaningful participation of all relevant stakeholders including civil society, the private sector, and the technical community.” (Starts at 19:01<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) Iraq speaking on behalf of G77+China said: “The Group firmly rejects the application of unilateral coercive measures, such actions that undermine international law and the charter of the United Nations, seriously hinder scientific cooperation, restrict access to technology and obstructs access of developing countries to achieve inclusive and sustained development.” (starts at 44:23<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). […] “The Group further reiterates the need to uphold the principles of digital sovereignty, equity and the right to development in the digital era.” (starts at 46:21<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). […] The outcomes of this review should also give impetus to implement the recent commitments contained in the Global Digital Compact.” (starts at 46:56) (full written statement<https://www.g77.org/statement/getstatement.php?id=250528b>) European Union and candidate countries: “We commit to proactively defending the general availability and integrity of the Internet as a global, interoperable network of networks, reflecting the importance of the multistakeholder model of Internet governance as enshrined in the Tunis Agenda and re-affirmed in the GDC. We believe that effective Internet governance must be inclusive, participatory, action-oriented, and consensus-driven, involving a broad array of actors from the public sector, private sector, civil society, technical community, academia, regional and international organizations. We are also committed to ensuring alignment between the WSIS process and the implementation of the GDC, to maximizing impact and synergies, while reducing duplication and avoiding competition for scarce financial resources.” The EU proposal further included: * Fortification of the multistakeholder governance model of the Internet and support the use of the multistakeholder governance sandboxes. * Permanent institutionalization of the IGF beyond 2025. * Advocacy for a consolidated multistakeholder governance approach, recalling the GDC and San Paulo Multistakeholder guidelines. * Establishment of the WSIS+20 Multistakeholder sounding board. (full written statement<https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-new-york/eu-statement-%E2%80%93-un...>). Lithuania called for the: * Strengthening of the IGF role and its institutionalization beyond 2025. * Resistance to undermining the multistakeholder internet governance model. * Ceasing the discussion about enhanced cooperation. In regard to the latter Lithuania added: “With IANA transition within ICANN in 2016 addressed the root cause of this process – ensuring that no particular state government has exclusive oversight role over critical internet resources. Debate about public policy component of internet governance must be continued, instead. It is also essential to ensure synergies and complementarity between the WSIS-post 20 and the Global Digital Compact—an especially critical consideration, amid the current liquidity crisis.” (full written statement<https://un.mfa.lt/en/news/26/statement-delivered-by-the-republic-of-lithuani...>) Iran said: “However the main part of the WSIS mandate is still unfinished.” […] “The Tunis agenda made a specific reference to call in paragraph 69 to 71 for recognizing the need for enhanced cooperation to enable governments on an equal footing to carry out the rules and responsibilities in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet. Ever since any progress on this specific mandate on enhanced cooperation has been blocked. It is important that this main issue of WSIS to be addressed effectively by the international community and this process. Another area of importance to developing countries yet to be realized is a more inclusive and transparent Internet governance. The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) has been convened as a platform to expand multistakeholder policy dialogue related to the key elements of the Internet governance as indicated in the Tunis Agenda. However mandate-wise it has not been in a position to enable governance on its equal footing, to carry out the roles and responsibilities in International public policies issues pertaining to Internet and to lead an International cooperation on inter alia development of globally applicable principle on public policy issues associated with the coordination and management of critical Internet resources as a sign to enhance cooperation in the Tunis Agenda. In WSIS 20 we need to strengthen the role of the states in the global governance of Internet and maximizing the participation of developing countries in policy and decision-making process leading to Internet governance in accordance with paragraph 68 of the Tunis agenda. And excellencies, there is a strong need that stakeholders rather than a state observe principles, rules and norms for their responsible behavior in ICT environment and be accountable for their behavior. This is also under discussion at the ongoing Open-ended working group on cybersecurity within the United Nations. And this for us is a stage to consider ways and means to ensure appropriate measures with a view to making the private sector with extraterritorial impact including platforms accountable for their ICT behavior and exercise due control over ICT companies and platforms under their jurisdiction.” […] “The states which have monopoly and dominance in ICT environment including Internet shall not use ICT advances as a tool for economic, political or any other types of coercive measures including limiting and blocking measures against targeted countries.” (starts at 1:00:01<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) Cuba (aligns with G77+China): “We reiterate that unilateral coercive measures including those targeting telecommunications and digital infrastructure undermine the development of the ICT capacities in affected countries.” (starts at 1:05:15<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) “The Global Digital Compact does not replace the World Summit on Information Society. It constitutes a further effort to achieve goals proposed at WSIS. The review should look at how to reconcile both processes. We do not favor new mechanisms or processes for the implementation of follow-up of WSIS and the Global Digital Compact.” (starts at 1:05:31<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) Uganda (aligns with G77+China): “ It is important that existing platforms such as the International telecommunications Union, the Internet Governance Forum, the STI Forum of the ECOSOC and the Commission on Science and Technology and Development remain relevant.“ (starts at 1:10:10<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) South Africa (aligns with G77+China): “The Global Digital Compact and WSIS are mutually reinforcing blueprint documents.” […] “In this respect it is expected that the WSIS review should be aligned with the Global Digital Compact.” (starts at 1:13:34) Indonesia (aligns with G77+China): “We support the implementation of commitments from the Pact for the Future and the Global Digital Compact in synergy with the WSIS architecture to ensure the unified approach to digital cooperation.” (starts at 1:17:50<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) Japan: “It is impossible for governments to tackle this issue [digital divide] alone and multistakeholders must work together. In this respect we believe that WSIS is a highly valuable platform where broad community of multistakeholders can combine their efforts and we should keep the framework going beyond 2025. The Internet Governance Forum notably is a time-tested forum acknowledged in the Global Digital Compact as, I quote, “the primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues.” In order to further promote collaboration among the multistakeholders we should continue and strengthen the IGF and also make it permanent.” […] “Japan is determined to work together with multistakeholders including governments, the private sector, civil society, the technical community, academia and international and regional organizations.” (starts at 1:19:02<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) […] Japan further believes that we can create mutual synergies between the WSIS process and the GDC to make these efforts more effective and efficient.” (starts at 1:21:18<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) Switzerland: “WSIS plus means creating a stronger, connected, and inclusive framework for digital governance and cooperation while integrating the ambitions of the Global Digital Compact. Rather than creating parallel processes we must unify them, streamlining governance, avoiding duplication, and leveraging synergies between a multistakeholder approach and multilateral cooperation which has made WSIS so impactful.” (starts at 1:22:23<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) Switzerland further proposed the creation of: * Joint implementation roadmap integrating GDC commitments with WSIS implementation work. * An enhanced UN group on Information Society adding relevant UN bodies such as ODET and reinforcing multistakeholder engagement within it. * A clearer UN governance and accountability system on digital governance by strengthening the CSTD and ECOSOC which would review progress both on WSIS and GDC. * A permanent, reinforced and even more inclusive IGF with sustainable funding, stronger connections, and tangible impacts within the WSIS architecture. Nepal aligned itself with G77+China. Colombia: “Ultimately cooperation through WSIS, multistakeholder mechanisms enhanced by the strategic direction of the Global Digital Compact is vital.” (starts at 1:32:18) <https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716> The Netherlands: “We acknowledge that the WSIS architecture has contributed to bridging the digital divides, including the gender divide through meaningful multistakeholder participation.” (starts at 1:33:35<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) The Netherlands also: · Advocated for strengthening linkages between GDC and WSIS commitments. · Is committed to global, interoperable, and secure Internet. · Recognized the risk of Internet fragmentation and its impact on global Internet interoperability. · Committed to proactively defend the general availability and integrity of the Internet as a global, interoperable network of networks reflecting the importance of the multistakeholder model of Internet governance as enshrined in the Tunis Agenda and reconfirmed in the Global Digital Compact. · Mentioned the importance of the technical community in Internet governance. · Supported the continuation of the IGF and its funding. · Supported the EU multistakeholder sounding board proposal. United States: “WSIS+20 review as an independent framework should focus on the review of the implementation of WSIS outcomes not on the connection to other processes. The United States has made clear we will no longer affirm the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals as a matter of course. And this process should not link itself with programs like these that are inconsistent with state sovereignty.” (starts at 1:36:59<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) […] “In this process we must protect the key ingredients in the success of WSIS: the multistakeholder model. WSIS should continue to support the U.N. agencies in fostering collaboration with stakeholders across public and private sectors, the technical community and civil society. WSIS should advocate for frameworks that support voluntary guidelines and best practices, allowing for many perspectives and rapid technological advancements, otherwise we risk encouraging a regulatory approach centralized in the United Nations that decreases sovereignty and hinders progress and innovation.” (starts at 1:37:58<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) […] Another monumental success in the first 20 years of WSIS has been the work of the Internet Governance Forum, to ensure that all stakeholders, including the engineers, entrepreneurs and innovators that run the Internet are part of the global conversation about the Internet. This is critical to endure the vibrancy and impact of the Internet does not fall victim to top-down governmental regulation and bureaucratic inertia.” […] “We call for the U.N. to extend the mandate of the IGF when it expires later this year and strengthen its work as a bottom-up, multistakeholder fora to discuss Internet public policy issues. Lastly, we encourage coherence among the range of U.N. processes working on digital technologies, including from the Global Digital Compact and 20 years of the WSIS implementation. This alignment can help ensure the U.N. works effectively towards closing digital divides, without duplication of effort or additional budget obligations. Thank you and we look forward to continuing to work with all stakeholders as we move through the WSIS overall review.” (starts at 1:38:55<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). China (aligned with G77+China): “To uphold multilateralism and create synergies the U.N. should play a coordinating role in international development cooperation, step up its leadership, coordinate the implementation of the WSIS outcomes, the Global Digital Compact, and relevant G8 resolutions on AI.” (starts at 1:42:15<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). Australia (also on behalf of Canada): “WSIS has enabled the success and demonstrated the power of the collaborative and multistakeholder digital governance.” […] “We see the GDC and WSIS as two clearly distinct processes that complement each other.” […] It allows us to reflect […] on the challenges of […] preserving the fragile Internet infrastructure.” […] “The review will be another occasion to re-affirm the ongoing relevance of the current eleven WSIS action lines.” (starts at 1:43:39<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>).“ […] “We must continue efforts towards multilingualism online (starts at 1:45:00<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>).“ […] “WSIS+20 offers an opportunity to renew and strengthen the multistakeholder governance of the Internet and new and emerging technologies.” […] “We believe that NETmundiale+10 San Paolo multistakeholder guidelines serve as a solid foundation in this regard.” […] “Harnessing the benefits of technology and mitigating its risks require the active and meaningful participation of stakeholders from government, private sector, the technical community, civil society, and academia. The WSIS architecture, such as the IGF and the WSIS Forum has served us well over the last 20 years demonstrating the value of the inclusive, multistakeholder discussions on Internet governance and digital technologies. We welcome the opportunity to review the WSIS together, to collectively write the next chapter of our digital future.” (starts at 1:45:23<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). Brazil (aligns with G77+China): stressed four points as key outcomes from the WSIS+20 review: · Integration of the WSIS process with the GDC (starts at 1:50:00<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). · Called to strengthen the role of the IGF, “evolve its scope”, and “may involve terminological update as “Digital Governance Forum”, “transformation of the IGF into a permanent forum with a stable and predictable budget”. (starts at 1:50:33<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). · “Reenforcing the role of ODET, working closely with existing mechanisms” (starts at 1:50:53<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) · Ensuring that ultimate priority goes to achieving the SDGs and bridging the digital divide. Brazil also added that its “delegation looks forward to working with all stakeholders.” Philippines aligned with G77+China. “The Philippines recognizes the importance of the WSIS+20 review in informing and complementing the Global Digital Compact. We emphasize that the GDC must build on the foundations laid by the WSIS process.” […] “We believe it is essential that the WSIS action lines continue to be central to digital cooperation and hence we think it is necessary to anchor the GDC in the larger WSIS framework including through the review process.” (starts at 1:52:52<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). United Kingdom: “We would like to see a permanent mandate for the IGF and much stronger recognition of national and regional IGFs.” […] “We should re-affirm the multistakeholder model of Internet governance following the example of the Global Digital Compact last year. We support member-states of the CSTD in calling for the initiatives from the GDC to be fully integrated into the WSIS process to avoid the risk of separate duplicative processes. We believe that the existing WSIS action lines provide an enduring framework that addresses the opportunities and challenges of the future.” […] “There is a big agenda ahead and it is important that multistakeholders can contribute meaningfully to the process. We welcome the steps so far to welcome the multistakeholder participation. For that participation to be meaningful it will be important to set out in detail how and when stakeholders can participate and how their contributions will be taken into account.” (starts at 1:56:22<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). Russian Federation: “We are convinced of the need to extend the WSIS mandate.” […] “Another 10-year period is important for implementing the pending, unimplemented decisions of the Summit, particularly those related to Internet governance, bridging the digital divide and abandoning illegitimate unilateral measures that hinder technological development.” […] “We stress that it is unacceptable to substitute the WSIS process with the implementation of the non-consensual Global Digital Compact. We categorically oppose any idea of the contribution to the implementation of the compact to be made by the U.N. Commission on Science and Technology for Development, the International Telecommunication Union and WSIS. We see this as unacceptable attempt to re-shape the U.N. digital agenda in order to serve the goals that are in the Compact which was drafted by the economic actors from developed countries and lays the groundwork for their monopolization of global ICT markets. In addition, it puts non-governmental actors on an equal footing with states when it comes to shaping decisions related to the international scientific and technological agenda. The Global Digital Compact is neither legally-binding nor universally accepted. A number of countries disassociated themselves from the consensus on it. The text is a collection of declarations and nothing more, and it is drafting involved numerous procedural violations. States’ opinions were very selectively considered by the coordinators, whereas the WSIS process is on the contrary a consensually agreed foundation for fair ICT regulation and it ranks much higher in the U.N. system than the Global Digital Compact. We believe it is important to avoid the duplication of efforts taken by the International Telecommunication Union , the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, WSIS and the Global Digital Compact by clearly distributing specific areas of responsibility. The implementation of the Global Digital Compact should not interfere with the mandate of other entities working on the U.N. digital agenda.”(starts at 1:58:33<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). United Arab Emirates (aligns with G77+China): “We need to foster the multistakeholder approach. It is essential that we create action-oriented partnerships across all sectors, including the private sector, civil society, and academia. This multistakeholder model will help ensure that the future of the digital World is shaped by diverse perspectives and expertise.” […] The WSIS review “should align with the agreed frameworks such as the Global Digital Compact.” (starts at 2:04:33<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>) Uruguay (aligns with G77+China): “Multilingualism online should also be a fundamental pillar to ensure equal access to knowledge and cultural diversity. Digital fragmentation around the governance of the Internet and the limited capacity of developing counties to make full use from the opportunities of the digital economy and the need to promote international cooperation that is more equitable are other matters that should be urgently addressed in this review.” […] “We want the process that we are beginning to lead to synergies with the Global Digital Compact [...] which will also help to avoid duplication.” (starts at 2:07:35<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). Morocco (aligns with G77+China): “Several subjects need to be addressed. Notably: […] how to govern the Internet and digital technologies and standards, structures and values that have to be adopted to adapt and tailor the current action framework. Amendments can also be made to technology’s infrastructure to remedy the unequal distribution of IT infrastructure. The action lines can also reflect how the situation has evolved, such as in trust and security.” […] (starts at 2:11:16<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). […] “Multistakeholderism, a cornerstone of WSIS, must be bolstered to ensure the principles of inclusivity, openness and transparency by preserving the role of government in the decision-making process.” […] “The success of the [Global Digital] Compact will depend on how to strengthen the existing mechanisms such as the Internet Governance Forum and the High-Level Event whose mandate expires this year by ensuring that these platforms remain dynamic for dialogue and innovation. (starts at 2:12:24<https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uazgz716>). ### End notes.