Hi to all Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do. I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following: * leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide; * 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); * More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; * The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; * Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and, * A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval. Look forward to hearing others perspectives. Fiona
Thanks for sharing, Fiona. Agree with your points - and on your second-last bullet: It looks like the invitation for the IGF to spin up a GDC-related discussion track has been removed, and replaced (somewhat) by a call for the WSIS+20 review to look at how the IGF, WSIS Forum, NRIs and other WSIS structures can support GDC implementation. I’m a bit ambivalent about the change, but I think it’s probably a positive nod to the importance of ongoing work under WSIS (though, as you say, now competing in some ways with new approaches in the New York space - though the tail-end of para. 71 seems to hint at the need to align those different activities). Also interesting that paragraphs 8k, 27, and 65, all of which reference the different stakeholder groups, do so in different ways each time… not sure of the significance of that (if any - perhaps just an editorial quirk). Cheers, Chris
On 28 Aug 2024, at 13:03, Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Hi to all
Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do.
I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following: leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide; 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and, A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval.
Look forward to hearing others perspectives.
Fiona <GDC rev4_27 August silence pocedure.pdf>_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi all, Given the differences on contentious topics, kicking the can down the road seems the best compromise for now, and I think this review does that. I agree with others’ analysis of detailed language, but overall, I think this should be good enough. There will be a lot of moving pieces heading to WSIS+20, and I agree with the view on the importance of this year’s IGF. Best, Isra Israel Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Internet Society Donate today.<https://bit.ly/3nUsQmJ> From: Chris Buckridge via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, 28 August 2024 at 7:18 a.m. To: Fiona Alexander <fionaa@american.edu> Cc: ICANN WSIS+20 <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released Thanks for sharing, Fiona. Agree with your points - and on your second-last bullet: It looks like the invitation for the IGF to spin up a GDC-related discussion track has been removed, and replaced (somewhat) by a call for the WSIS+20 review to look at how the IGF, WSIS Forum, NRIs and other WSIS structures can support GDC implementation. I’m a bit ambivalent about the change, but I think it’s probably a positive nod to the importance of ongoing work under WSIS (though, as you say, now competing in some ways with new approaches in the New York space - though the tail-end of para. 71 seems to hint at the need to align those different activities). Also interesting that paragraphs 8k, 27, and 65, all of which reference the different stakeholder groups, do so in different ways each time… not sure of the significance of that (if any - perhaps just an editorial quirk). Cheers, Chris On 28 Aug 2024, at 13:03, Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote: Hi to all Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do. I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following: · leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide; · 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); · More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; · The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; · Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and, · A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval. Look forward to hearing others perspectives. Fiona <GDC rev4_27 August silence pocedure.pdf>_______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
The recognition of the NRIs is very good! De: Wolfgang Kleinwächter via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Enviada: 28 de agosto de 2024 12:32 Para: Fiona Alexander <fionaa@american.edu>; Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Assunto: [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released Hi all, dateline for the 2nd silence pocedure is August 29, 15.00. I share Fionas first quick conclusions. It is "status quo" for the IGF in Geneva and "Status quo plus" for a new GDC in New York. Imbalance is growing. Indeed, WSIS+20 is more recognized and it remains to be seen whether die GDC follow up will be under WSIS+20 or WSIS+20 will be incorporated into a GDC Follow Up (under the leadership of Amandeeps new office in New York). For the 2027 big GDC conference, it remains in the hand of governments. Bad. However, the door for more multistakeholder activities is open. It is up the communities (and, inter alia, the IGF-LP) to be more pro-active and to come with concrete initiatives (as a plan for WSIS+20 PrepComs (in Geneva), implementation of the SPMGs or "the Internet we Want"). There should be a "Call from Riyad" for the WSIS+20 process. Wolfgang Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> hat am 28.08.2024 13:03 CEST geschrieben: Hi to all Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do. I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following: * leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide; * 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); * More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; * The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; * Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and, * A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval. Look forward to hearing others perspectives. Fiona _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thanks Fiona, Veni, Carlos and all This may be a late/redundant observation (or a bit of both). I have just noticed in the pre-amble: 4. Our goal is an inclusive, open, sustainable, fair, safe and secure
digital future for all. This Global Digital Compact sets out the objectives, principles, commitments and actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain.
I now see this was first introduced in Rev 2* but not in the preamble. *In that revision, it was mentioned 4 times concerning capacity-building type activities in the non-military domain. In that context, in my view, it is a beneficial inclusion. Rev 3 removed those contexts and only has the term non-military domain once in the preamble as above. Does this reading then allow the objectives, principles, commitments or actions to be put aside in a military domain (thanks Mark for comments here ) <https://www.eurodig.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/GDC-Rev1-and-Rev-2-compar...> And what is 'in a military domain'? Is this a UN term that has a definition somewhere else? Preferably defined in said humanitarian law? My head is spinning with questions - what circumstance would 'the military domain' apply? Would general 'national security interests' or 'military defence intelligence or operations' apply or are we talking about active military interventions? Does that cover localised military actions against civilians under 'civil unrest' or international warfare? Sorry for the last-moment alarm and knowing there's probably nothing more this hard-working frustrated network can do about many things. Perhaps just something to be mindful of as we go into WSIS+20? Or I should take some nice tea get a good night's sleep and stop being a dramatic newbie? Appreciate your contributions and updates btw. It has been very helpful for me to get my head around it all. Kiki On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 12:10 AM Ana Neves via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
The recognition of the NRIs is very good!
*De:* Wolfgang Kleinwächter via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Enviada:* 28 de agosto de 2024 12:32 *Para:* Fiona Alexander <fionaa@american.edu>; Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Assunto:* [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released
Hi all,
dateline for the 2nd silence pocedure is August 29, 15.00. I share Fionas first quick conclusions. It is "status quo" for the IGF in Geneva and "Status quo plus" for a new GDC in New York. Imbalance is growing. Indeed, WSIS+20 is more recognized and it remains to be seen whether die GDC follow up will be under WSIS+20 or WSIS+20 will be incorporated into a GDC Follow Up (under the leadership of Amandeeps new office in New York). For the 2027 big GDC conference, it remains in the hand of governments. Bad. However, the door for more multistakeholder activities is open. It is up the communities (and, inter alia, the IGF-LP) to be more pro-active and to come with concrete initiatives (as a plan for WSIS+20 PrepComs (in Geneva), implementation of the SPMGs or "the Internet we Want"). There should be a "Call from Riyad" for the WSIS+20 process.
Wolfgang
Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> hat am 28.08.2024 13:03 CEST geschrieben:
Hi to all
Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do.
I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following:
- leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide;
- 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge);
- More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure;
- The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain;
- Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and,
- A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval.
Look forward to hearing others perspectives.
Fiona
_______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Kiki Fong Lim, Thank you for your question! I would like to draw attention to this issue once again. It was also was a little ununderstandable for me. What is 'in a military domain'? "Is this a UN term that has a definition somewhere else? Is it preferably defined in said humanitarian law?" " Would general 'national security interests' or 'military defense intelligence or operations' apply or are we talking about active military interventions? Does that cover localized military actions against civilians under 'civil unrest' or international warfare?" In Global Digital Compact 6 September 2024, I see: In 4. Our goal is an inclusive, open, sustainable, fair, safe, and secure digital future for all. This Global Digital Compact sets out the objectives, principles, commitments, and actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain. What does it mean "actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain." Sincerely yours, Anna Karakhanyan AMNIC Administrator On 29.08.24 13:42, Kiki Fong Lim via wsis20 wrote:
Thanks Fiona, Veni, Carlos and all
This may be a late/redundant observation (or a bit of both). I have just noticed in the pre-amble:
4. Our goal is an inclusive, open, sustainable, fair, safe and secure digital future for all. This Global Digital Compact sets out the objectives, principles, commitments and actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain.
I now see this was first introduced in Rev 2_ but not in the preamble. _In that revision, it was mentioned 4 times concerning capacity-building type activities in the non-military domain. In that context, in my view, it is a beneficial inclusion.
Rev 3 removed those contexts and only has the term non-military domain once in the preamble as above. Does this reading then allow the objectives, principles, commitments or actions to be put aside in a military domain (thanks Mark for comments here ) <https://www.eurodig.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/GDC-Rev1-and-Rev-2-compar...>
And what is 'in a military domain'? Is this a UN term that has a definition somewhere else? Preferably defined in said humanitarian law?
My head is spinning with questions - what circumstance would 'the military domain' apply? Would general 'national security interests' or 'military defence intelligence or operations' apply or are we talking about active military interventions? Does that cover localised military actions against civilians under 'civil unrest' or international warfare?
Sorry for the last-moment alarm and knowing there's probably nothing more this hard-working frustrated network can do about many things. Perhaps just something to be mindful of as we go into WSIS+20? Or I should take some nice tea get a good night's sleep and stop being a dramatic newbie?
Appreciate your contributions and updates btw. It has been very helpful for me to get my head around it all.
Kiki
On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 12:10 AM Ana Neves via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
The recognition of the NRIs is very good!
*De:*Wolfgang Kleinwächter via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Enviada:* 28 de agosto de 2024 12:32 *Para:* Fiona Alexander <fionaa@american.edu>; Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> *Assunto:* [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released
Hi all,
dateline for the 2nd silence pocedure is August 29, 15.00. I share Fionas first quick conclusions. It is "status quo" for the IGF in Geneva and "Status quo plus" for a new GDC in New York. Imbalance is growing. Indeed, WSIS+20 is more recognized and it remains to be seen whether die GDC follow up will be under WSIS+20 or WSIS+20 will be incorporated into a GDC Follow Up (under the leadership of Amandeeps new office in New York). For the 2027 big GDC conference, it remains in the hand of governments. Bad. However, the door for more multistakeholder activities is open. It is up the communities (and, inter alia, the IGF-LP) to be more pro-active and to come with concrete initiatives (as a plan for WSIS+20 PrepComs (in Geneva), implementation of the SPMGs or "the Internet we Want"). There should be a "Call from Riyad" for the WSIS+20 process.
Wolfgang
Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> hat am 28.08.2024 13:03 CEST geschrieben:
Hi to all
Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do.
I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following:
* leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide;
* 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge);
* More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure;
* The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain;
* Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and,
* A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval.
Look forward to hearing others perspectives.
Fiona
_______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources:https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list:https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
I am sending herewith the Pact for the Future 4.0 September 13 ----------------- Bazlu _____________ AHM. Bazlur Rahman MSS in Government & Politics, Bachelor of Laws (LL. B) Chief Executive Officer Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) [In Consultative Status with the ECOSOC, Associated with the Department of Global Communications of the United Nations & Observer Organization with the UNFCCC & Digital Cooperation Organization (DCO)] Policy Research Fellow, Shaping the Future of Media, Entertainment & Society in the Era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution House: 9/4 Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207| Bangladesh| Phone: +8801711881647 | +88 02 48116262 | +88 02 48119374 E-Mail: ceo@bnnrc.net<mailto:ceo@bnnrc.net> | bnnrcbd@gmail.com<mailto:bnnrcbd@gmail.com> | https://www.bnnrc.net<http://www.bnnrc.net/> [cid:1a7da2c4-9a57-49be-8211-20b987193b90] ________________________________ From: Anna Karakhanyan via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Sent: 13 September 2024 6:10 PM To: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released Dear Kiki Fong Lim, Thank you for your question! I would like to draw attention to this issue once again. It was also was a little ununderstandable for me. What is 'in a military domain'? "Is this a UN term that has a definition somewhere else? Is it preferably defined in said humanitarian law?" " Would general 'national security interests' or 'military defense intelligence or operations' apply or are we talking about active military interventions? Does that cover localized military actions against civilians under 'civil unrest' or international warfare?" In Global Digital Compact 6 September 2024, I see: In 4. Our goal is an inclusive, open, sustainable, fair, safe, and secure digital future for all. This Global Digital Compact sets out the objectives, principles, commitments, and actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain. What does it mean "actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain." Sincerely yours, Anna Karakhanyan AMNIC Administrator On 29.08.24 13:42, Kiki Fong Lim via wsis20 wrote: Thanks Fiona, Veni, Carlos and all This may be a late/redundant observation (or a bit of both). I have just noticed in the pre-amble: 4. Our goal is an inclusive, open, sustainable, fair, safe and secure digital future for all. This Global Digital Compact sets out the objectives, principles, commitments and actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain. I now see this was first introduced in Rev 2 but not in the preamble. In that revision, it was mentioned 4 times concerning capacity-building type activities in the non-military domain. In that context, in my view, it is a beneficial inclusion. Rev 3 removed those contexts and only has the term non-military domain once in the preamble as above. Does this reading then allow the objectives, principles, commitments or actions to be put aside in a military domain (thanks Mark for comments here )<https://www.eurodig.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/GDC-Rev1-and-Rev-2-compar...> And what is 'in a military domain'? Is this a UN term that has a definition somewhere else? Preferably defined in said humanitarian law? My head is spinning with questions - what circumstance would 'the military domain' apply? Would general 'national security interests' or 'military defence intelligence or operations' apply or are we talking about active military interventions? Does that cover localised military actions against civilians under 'civil unrest' or international warfare? Sorry for the last-moment alarm and knowing there's probably nothing more this hard-working frustrated network can do about many things. Perhaps just something to be mindful of as we go into WSIS+20? Or I should take some nice tea get a good night's sleep and stop being a dramatic newbie? Appreciate your contributions and updates btw. It has been very helpful for me to get my head around it all. Kiki On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 12:10 AM Ana Neves via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: The recognition of the NRIs is very good! De: Wolfgang Kleinwächter via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> Enviada: 28 de agosto de 2024 12:32 Para: Fiona Alexander <fionaa@american.edu<mailto:fionaa@american.edu>>; Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> Assunto: [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released Hi all, dateline for the 2nd silence pocedure is August 29, 15.00. I share Fionas first quick conclusions. It is "status quo" for the IGF in Geneva and "Status quo plus" for a new GDC in New York. Imbalance is growing. Indeed, WSIS+20 is more recognized and it remains to be seen whether die GDC follow up will be under WSIS+20 or WSIS+20 will be incorporated into a GDC Follow Up (under the leadership of Amandeeps new office in New York). For the 2027 big GDC conference, it remains in the hand of governments. Bad. However, the door for more multistakeholder activities is open. It is up the communities (and, inter alia, the IGF-LP) to be more pro-active and to come with concrete initiatives (as a plan for WSIS+20 PrepComs (in Geneva), implementation of the SPMGs or "the Internet we Want"). There should be a "Call from Riyad" for the WSIS+20 process. Wolfgang Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> hat am 28.08.2024 13:03 CEST geschrieben: Hi to all Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do. I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following: * leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide; * 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); * More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; * The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; * Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and, * A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval. Look forward to hearing others perspectives. Fiona _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Bazlu _____________ AHM. Bazlur Rahman MSS in Government & Politics, Bachelor of Laws (LL. B) Chief Executive Officer Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) [In Consultative Status with the ECOSOC, Associated with the Department of Global Communications of the United Nations & Observer Organization with the UNFCCC & Digital Cooperation Organization (DCO)] Policy Research Fellow, Shaping the Future of Media, Entertainment & Society in the Era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution House: 9/4 Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207| Bangladesh| Phone: +8801711881647 | +88 02 48116262 | +88 02 48119374 E-Mail: ceo@bnnrc.net<mailto:ceo@bnnrc.net> | bnnrcbd@gmail.com<mailto:bnnrcbd@gmail.com> | https://www.bnnrc.net<http://www.bnnrc.net/> [cid:a906e939-03e1-4e10-b1c3-f14a6e147b9a] ________________________________ From: AHM Bazlur Rahman via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Sent: 14 September 2024 8:17 AM To: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org>; Anna Karakhanyan <anna.karakhanyan@isoc.am> Subject: [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released I am sending herewith the Pact for the Future 4.0 September 13 ----------------- Bazlu _____________ AHM. Bazlur Rahman MSS in Government & Politics, Bachelor of Laws (LL. B) Chief Executive Officer Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) [In Consultative Status with the ECOSOC, Associated with the Department of Global Communications of the United Nations & Observer Organization with the UNFCCC & Digital Cooperation Organization (DCO)] Policy Research Fellow, Shaping the Future of Media, Entertainment & Society in the Era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution House: 9/4 Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207| Bangladesh| Phone: +8801711881647 | +88 02 48116262 | +88 02 48119374 E-Mail: ceo@bnnrc.net<mailto:ceo@bnnrc.net> | bnnrcbd@gmail.com<mailto:bnnrcbd@gmail.com> | https://www.bnnrc.net<http://www.bnnrc.net/> [cid:1a7da2c4-9a57-49be-8211-20b987193b90] ________________________________ From: Anna Karakhanyan via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Sent: 13 September 2024 6:10 PM To: wsis20@icann.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released Dear Kiki Fong Lim, Thank you for your question! I would like to draw attention to this issue once again. It was also was a little ununderstandable for me. What is 'in a military domain'? "Is this a UN term that has a definition somewhere else? Is it preferably defined in said humanitarian law?" " Would general 'national security interests' or 'military defense intelligence or operations' apply or are we talking about active military interventions? Does that cover localized military actions against civilians under 'civil unrest' or international warfare?" In Global Digital Compact 6 September 2024, I see: In 4. Our goal is an inclusive, open, sustainable, fair, safe, and secure digital future for all. This Global Digital Compact sets out the objectives, principles, commitments, and actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain. What does it mean "actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain." Sincerely yours, Anna Karakhanyan AMNIC Administrator On 29.08.24 13:42, Kiki Fong Lim via wsis20 wrote: Thanks Fiona, Veni, Carlos and all This may be a late/redundant observation (or a bit of both). I have just noticed in the pre-amble: 4. Our goal is an inclusive, open, sustainable, fair, safe and secure digital future for all. This Global Digital Compact sets out the objectives, principles, commitments and actions we undertake to achieve it in the non-military domain. I now see this was first introduced in Rev 2 but not in the preamble. In that revision, it was mentioned 4 times concerning capacity-building type activities in the non-military domain. In that context, in my view, it is a beneficial inclusion. Rev 3 removed those contexts and only has the term non-military domain once in the preamble as above. Does this reading then allow the objectives, principles, commitments or actions to be put aside in a military domain (thanks Mark for comments here )<https://www.eurodig.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/GDC-Rev1-and-Rev-2-compar...> And what is 'in a military domain'? Is this a UN term that has a definition somewhere else? Preferably defined in said humanitarian law? My head is spinning with questions - what circumstance would 'the military domain' apply? Would general 'national security interests' or 'military defence intelligence or operations' apply or are we talking about active military interventions? Does that cover localised military actions against civilians under 'civil unrest' or international warfare? Sorry for the last-moment alarm and knowing there's probably nothing more this hard-working frustrated network can do about many things. Perhaps just something to be mindful of as we go into WSIS+20? Or I should take some nice tea get a good night's sleep and stop being a dramatic newbie? Appreciate your contributions and updates btw. It has been very helpful for me to get my head around it all. Kiki On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 12:10 AM Ana Neves via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> wrote: The recognition of the NRIs is very good! De: Wolfgang Kleinwächter via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> Enviada: 28 de agosto de 2024 12:32 Para: Fiona Alexander <fionaa@american.edu<mailto:fionaa@american.edu>>; Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> Assunto: [wsis20] Re: GDC Rev 4 released Hi all, dateline for the 2nd silence pocedure is August 29, 15.00. I share Fionas first quick conclusions. It is "status quo" for the IGF in Geneva and "Status quo plus" for a new GDC in New York. Imbalance is growing. Indeed, WSIS+20 is more recognized and it remains to be seen whether die GDC follow up will be under WSIS+20 or WSIS+20 will be incorporated into a GDC Follow Up (under the leadership of Amandeeps new office in New York). For the 2027 big GDC conference, it remains in the hand of governments. Bad. However, the door for more multistakeholder activities is open. It is up the communities (and, inter alia, the IGF-LP) to be more pro-active and to come with concrete initiatives (as a plan for WSIS+20 PrepComs (in Geneva), implementation of the SPMGs or "the Internet we Want"). There should be a "Call from Riyad" for the WSIS+20 process. Wolfgang Fiona Alexander via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org<mailto:wsis20@icann.org>> hat am 28.08.2024 13:03 CEST geschrieben: Hi to all Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do. I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following: * leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide; * 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); * More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; * The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; * Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and, * A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval. Look forward to hearing others perspectives. Fiona _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20 Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/ _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Fiona et al, Looking at references to the IGF in rev 3 and 4… The rev 3 text included this text in clause 27:
We reaffirm the role of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as the primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues.
…which was updated in rev 4:
We reaffirm that Internet governance
should continue to follow the provisions set forth in the outcomes of the summits held in Geneva
and Tunis, including in relation to enhanced cooperation.
So rev 4 doesn’t reaffirm IGF specifically, but it reaffirms the Tunis agenda, which certainly did establishe the IGF as the "primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues". In that case, I guess this change isn’t so bad as a compromise text? Rev 4 also has this new text:
68. We will build on the processes and forums emanating from the WSIS, in particular the Internet
Governance Forum and its national and regional initiatives, as well as the WSIS Forum, to advance
implementation of this Compact. We look forward to the WSIS+20 Review in 2025 and invite it to
identify how these processes and Forums can support the contribution of all stakeholders to
Compact implementation.
I wonder if the words "build on" have a special meaning, for instance to imply something separate from that which is being built upon? If it’s not loaded in such a way, then this text can be taken to mean strengthening the IGF and NRIs, which would be a good thing obviously. Possibly, "strengthen" could be used instead of "build on", to clarify that is still about supporting the IGF, and not something else? Or is is better to live with the ambiguity in this case? Paul. On 28 Aug 2024, at 7:03, Fiona Alexander via wsis20 wrote:
Hi to all
Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do.
I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following:
* leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide; * 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); * More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; * The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; * Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and, * A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval.
Look forward to hearing others perspectives.
Fiona
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Greetings, all, Thanks Fiona and Paul for your submissions. I just want to add a little background to show that we're actually making some progress on the GDC document. From my perspective, the entire GDC SOTF is a continuation of the implementation of the WSIS Tunis Agenda 2005. As some may recall, the Tunis Agenda produced the two tracks of Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and Enhanced Cooperation to enable government on an equal footing oversee Public Policy matters pertaining to the Internet. While IGF started in 2006 and has been operational, the tract on Enhanced Cooperation did not commence until 2012 after the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development was mandated by the General Assembly (GA) to actualise it. It was further mandated to setup a Working Group for Government reps (with reps from the private sector, civil society, academic and technical communities) to firm up the mechanism for enhanced cooperation. The Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation (WGEC) (of which I was one of the 5 private sector members representing the private sector from the global south) worked in two phases between 2014 & 2018. At the 2nd phase, it was close to a concensus agreement for the CSTD+other stakeholders to oversee Internet public policy matters since dealing with public policy matters is already in the CSTD mandate. But Saudi Arabia objected and wanted an institution in the like of ITU to be created to oversee Internet public policy matters. So WGEC failed to submit a concensus report (concensus in WGEC unlike in ICANN is for there to be no objection at all). Then the UN Secretary General (SG) setup the High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation in 2018. The HLP submitted its report in 2019 and based on the report, the SG proposed the GDC-SOTF in his Common Digital Agenda report. An observation from my side is the softening of Saudi-Arabia's position on IGF (as they're the host of the 2024 IGF!), multistakeholderism and withdrawal of insistence on the creation of an institution like ITU for Internet public policy matters. A reduction of that demand to an Office may be a compromise. What I would expect is that the Office should have the concerned stakeholders embedded in its operations and should not be a government only entity for meaningful participation as outlined in Netmundial+10 principles and even in the GDC. If GDC is endorsed by all HoSs on September 22-23, 2024, it'd mark a significant milestone on the actualisation of the Tunis Agenda. The GDC itself apart from its focus on the actualization of the SDGs, it is also an instrument for the realization of the WSIS Geneva declaration 2003 Action Lines and Targets. Let's push more on the active participation of the concerned stakeholders (private sector, civil society, technical and academic communities) in the working of the new Office. At the same time, the GDC can still be subject matter discussion issues in CSTD and in the IGF. Cheers, JO -------------------------------- Jimson Olufuye PhD (fncs, ficma, c.ITP, PRINCE2, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PhD) Chairman, Advisory Council, AfICTA.africa Chairman, Kontemporary® Konsulting Ltd Consulting | Outsourcing | Cybersecurity Systems Integration | Maintenance Services www.kontemporary.net.ng Voice: 234 802 3183252 Data: 234 816 5012368 Skype: jolufuye This email is for the exclusive recipient/s and it may contain confidential materials. If you have received it and it is not meant for you, please alert me @ jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng or discard at once. Thank you. On 2024-09-03 20:22, Paul Wilson via wsis20 wrote:
Hi Fiona et al,
Looking at references to the IGF in rev 3 and 4…
The rev 3 text included this text in clause 27:
We reaffirm the role of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as the primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues.
…which was updated in rev 4:
We reaffirm that Internet governance
should continue to follow the provisions set forth in the outcomes of the summits held in Geneva
and Tunis, including in relation to enhanced cooperation.
So rev 4 doesn’t reaffirm IGF specifically, but it reaffirms the Tunis agenda, which certainly did establishe the IGF as the "primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues". In that case, I guess this change isn’t so bad as a compromise text? Rev 4 also has this new text:
68. We will build on the processes and forums emanating from the WSIS, in particular the Internet
Governance Forum and its national and regional initiatives, as well as the WSIS Forum, to advance
implementation of this Compact. We look forward to the WSIS+20 Review in 2025 and invite it to
identify how these processes and Forums can support the contribution of all stakeholders to
Compact implementation.
I wonder if the words "build on" have a special meaning, for instance to imply something separate from that which is being built upon? If it’s not loaded in such a way, then this text can be taken to mean strengthening the IGF and NRIs, which would be a good thing obviously.
Possibly, "strengthen" could be used instead of "build on", to clarify that is still about supporting the IGF, and not something else? Or is is better to live with the ambiguity in this case?
Paul.
On 28 Aug 2024, at 7:03, Fiona Alexander via wsis20 wrote:
Hi to all
Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do.
I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following:
* leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide;
* 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); * More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; * The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; * Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and,
* A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval.
Look forward to hearing others perspectives.
Fiona
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thx. Jimson and yes, it is a "never ending story" and will continue beyond 2030++. The key question is how to organize a bottom up policy development and decision making process which is open, transparent, inclusive and allows all concerned, affected and relevant stakehoders to be part of such a decentralized mechanism. It is "stumbling forward". And you are absolutely right, pro-active engagement by non-state actors is the best way to enhance the multistakeholder approach. The language of "enhanced cooperation" emerged as a tricky compromise in Tunis to avoid the establishment of an intergovernmental oversight mechanism over ICANN. The Tunis Agenda included two layers of enhanced cooperation: Enhanced cooperation among governments (where all governments have "equal rights"/this was the ICANN problem wich disappeared after the IANA transition) and enhanced cooperation among stakeholders. There was never an agreed definition. An academic group from our summer school proposed the formula "EC³" in 2008: enhanced communication, coordination and informal and formal collaboration among relevant governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. Lets wait and see, what the next episode (WSIS+20) will bring. BTW, any news from GDC Rev.5? Wolfgang
Dr Jimson Olufuye via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> hat am 04.09.2024 11:05 CEST geschrieben:
Greetings, all,
Thanks Fiona and Paul for your submissions.
I just want to add a little background to show that we're actually making some progress on the GDC document.
From my perspective, the entire GDC SOTF is a continuation of the implementation of the WSIS Tunis Agenda 2005. As some may recall, the Tunis Agenda produced the two tracks of Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and Enhanced Cooperation to enable government on an equal footing oversee Public Policy matters pertaining to the Internet. While IGF started in 2006 and has been operational, the tract on Enhanced Cooperation did not commence until 2012 after the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development was mandated by the General Assembly (GA) to actualise it. It was further mandated to setup a Working Group for Government reps (with reps from the private sector, civil society, academic and technical communities) to firm up the mechanism for enhanced cooperation. The Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation (WGEC) (of which I was one of the 5 private sector members representing the private sector from the global south) worked in two phases between 2014 & 2018. At the 2nd phase, it was close to a concensus agreement for the CSTD+other stakeholders to oversee Internet public policy matters since dealing with public policy matters is already in the CSTD mandate. But Saudi Arabia objected and wanted an institution in the like of ITU to be created to oversee Internet public policy matters. So WGEC failed to submit a concensus report (concensus in WGEC unlike in ICANN is for there to be no objection at all). Then the UN Secretary General (SG) setup the High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation in 2018. The HLP submitted its report in 2019 and based on the report, the SG proposed the GDC-SOTF in his Common Digital Agenda report.
An observation from my side is the softening of Saudi-Arabia's position on IGF (as they're the host of the 2024 IGF!), multistakeholderism and withdrawal of insistence on the creation of an institution like ITU for Internet public policy matters.
A reduction of that demand to an Office may be a compromise. What I would expect is that the Office should have the concerned stakeholders embedded in its operations and should not be a government only entity for meaningful participation as outlined in Netmundial+10 principles and even in the GDC.
If GDC is endorsed by all HoSs on September 22-23, 2024, it'd mark a significant milestone on the actualisation of the Tunis Agenda. The GDC itself apart from its focus on the actualization of the SDGs, it is also an instrument for the realization of the WSIS Geneva declaration 2003 Action Lines and Targets.
Let's push more on the active participation of the concerned stakeholders (private sector, civil society, technical and academic communities) in the working of the new Office. At the same time, the GDC can still be subject matter discussion issues in CSTD and in the IGF.
Cheers,
JO
-------------------------------- Jimson Olufuye PhD (fncs, ficma, c.ITP, PRINCE2, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PhD) Chairman, Advisory Council, AfICTA.africa Chairman, Kontemporary® Konsulting Ltd
Consulting | Outsourcing | Cybersecurity Systems Integration | Maintenance Services www.kontemporary.net.ng Voice: 234 802 3183252 Data: 234 816 5012368 Skype: jolufuye
This email is for the exclusive recipient/s and it may contain confidential materials. If you have received it and it is not meant for you, please alert me @ jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng or discard at once. Thank you.
On 2024-09-03 20:22, Paul Wilson via wsis20 wrote:
Hi Fiona et al,
Looking at references to the IGF in rev 3 and 4…
The rev 3 text included this text in clause 27:
We reaffirm the role of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as the primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues.
…which was updated in rev 4:
We reaffirm that Internet governance
should continue to follow the provisions set forth in the outcomes of the summits held in Geneva
and Tunis, including in relation to enhanced cooperation.
So rev 4 doesn’t reaffirm IGF specifically, but it reaffirms the Tunis agenda, which certainly did establishe the IGF as the "primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues". In that case, I guess this change isn’t so bad as a compromise text? Rev 4 also has this new text:
68. We will build on the processes and forums emanating from the WSIS, in particular the Internet
Governance Forum and its national and regional initiatives, as well as the WSIS Forum, to advance
implementation of this Compact. We look forward to the WSIS+20 Review in 2025 and invite it to
identify how these processes and Forums can support the contribution of all stakeholders to
Compact implementation.
I wonder if the words "build on" have a special meaning, for instance to imply something separate from that which is being built upon? If it’s not loaded in such a way, then this text can be taken to mean strengthening the IGF and NRIs, which would be a good thing obviously.
Possibly, "strengthen" could be used instead of "build on", to clarify that is still about supporting the IGF, and not something else? Or is is better to live with the ambiguity in this case?
Paul.
On 28 Aug 2024, at 7:03, Fiona Alexander via wsis20 wrote:
Hi to all
Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do.
I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following:
* leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide;
* 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); * More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; * The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; * Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and,
* A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval.
Look forward to hearing others perspectives.
Fiona
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Wolfgang, On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 5:23 PM Wolfgang Kleinwächter via wsis20 < wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Thx. Jimson
and yes, it is a "never ending story" and will continue beyond 2030++. The key question is how to organize a bottom up policy development and decision making process which is open, transparent, inclusive and allows all concerned, affected and relevant stakehoders to be part of such a decentralized mechanism. It is "stumbling forward". And you are absolutely right, pro-active engagement by non-state actors is the best way to enhance the multistakeholder approach.
The language of "enhanced cooperation" emerged as a tricky compromise in Tunis to avoid the establishment of an intergovernmental oversight mechanism over ICANN. The Tunis Agenda included two layers of enhanced cooperation: Enhanced cooperation among governments (where all governments have "equal rights"/this was the ICANN problem wich disappeared after the IANA transition) and enhanced cooperation among stakeholders.
If it disappeared after IANA transition, what does "enhanced cooperation" in the passage that Paul Wilson's referenced above (Paragraph titled Internet Governance point 27) imply? . "We reaffirm that Internet governance should continue to follow the provisions set forth in the outcomes of the summits held in Geneva and Tunis, including in relation to enhanced cooperation."
There was never an agreed definition. An academic group from our summer school proposed the formula "EC³" in 2008: enhanced communication, coordination and informal and formal collaboration among relevant governmental and non-governmental stakeholders. Lets wait and see, what the next episode (WSIS+20) will bring.
BTW, any news from GDC Rev.5?
Wolfgang
Dr Jimson Olufuye via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> hat am 04.09.2024 11:05 CEST geschrieben:
Greetings, all,
Thanks Fiona and Paul for your submissions.
I just want to add a little background to show that we're actually making some progress on the GDC document.
From my perspective, the entire GDC SOTF is a continuation of the implementation of the WSIS Tunis Agenda 2005. As some may recall, the Tunis Agenda produced the two tracks of Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and Enhanced Cooperation to enable government on an equal footing oversee Public Policy matters pertaining to the Internet. While IGF started in 2006 and has been operational, the tract on Enhanced Cooperation did not commence until 2012 after the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development was mandated by the General Assembly (GA) to actualise it. It was further mandated to setup a Working Group for Government reps (with reps from the private sector, civil society, academic and technical communities) to firm up the mechanism for enhanced cooperation. The Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation (WGEC) (of which I was one of the 5 private sector members representing the private sector from the global south) worked in two phases between 2014 & 2018. At the 2nd phase, it was close to a concensus agreement for the CSTD+other stakeholders to oversee Internet public policy matters since dealing with public policy matters is already in the CSTD mandate. But Saudi Arabia objected and wanted an institution in the like of ITU to be created to oversee Internet public policy matters. So WGEC failed to submit a concensus report (concensus in WGEC unlike in ICANN is for there to be no objection at all). Then the UN Secretary General (SG) setup the High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation in 2018. The HLP submitted its report in 2019 and based on the report, the SG proposed the GDC-SOTF in his Common Digital Agenda report.
An observation from my side is the softening of Saudi-Arabia's position on IGF (as they're the host of the 2024 IGF!), multistakeholderism and withdrawal of insistence on the creation of an institution like ITU for Internet public policy matters.
A reduction of that demand to an Office may be a compromise. What I would expect is that the Office should have the concerned stakeholders embedded in its operations and should not be a government only entity for meaningful participation as outlined in Netmundial+10 principles and even in the GDC.
If GDC is endorsed by all HoSs on September 22-23, 2024, it'd mark a significant milestone on the actualisation of the Tunis Agenda. The GDC itself apart from its focus on the actualization of the SDGs, it is also an instrument for the realization of the WSIS Geneva declaration 2003 Action Lines and Targets.
Let's push more on the active participation of the concerned stakeholders (private sector, civil society, technical and academic communities) in the working of the new Office. At the same time, the GDC can still be subject matter discussion issues in CSTD and in the IGF.
Cheers,
JO
-------------------------------- Jimson Olufuye PhD (fncs, ficma, c.ITP, PRINCE2, CISA, CISM, CRISC, PhD) Chairman, Advisory Council, AfICTA.africa Chairman, Kontemporary® Konsulting Ltd
Consulting | Outsourcing | Cybersecurity Systems Integration | Maintenance Services www.kontemporary.net.ng Voice: 234 802 3183252 Data: 234 816 5012368 Skype: jolufuye
This email is for the exclusive recipient/s and it may contain confidential materials. If you have received it and it is not meant for you, please alert me @ jolufuye@kontemporary.net.ng or discard at once. Thank you.
On 2024-09-03 20:22, Paul Wilson via wsis20 wrote:
Hi Fiona et al,
Looking at references to the IGF in rev 3 and 4…
The rev 3 text included this text in clause 27:
We reaffirm the role of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as the primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues.
…which was updated in rev 4:
We reaffirm that Internet governance
should continue to follow the provisions set forth in the outcomes of the summits held in Geneva
and Tunis, including in relation to enhanced cooperation.
So rev 4 doesn’t reaffirm IGF specifically, but it reaffirms the Tunis agenda, which certainly did establishe the IGF as the "primary multistakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues". In that case, I guess this change isn’t so bad as a compromise text? Rev 4 also has this new text:
68. We will build on the processes and forums emanating from the WSIS, in particular the Internet
Governance Forum and its national and regional initiatives, as well as the WSIS Forum, to advance
implementation of this Compact. We look forward to the WSIS+20 Review in 2025 and invite it to
identify how these processes and Forums can support the contribution of all stakeholders to
Compact implementation.
I wonder if the words "build on" have a special meaning, for instance to imply something separate from that which is being built upon? If it’s not loaded in such a way, then this text can be taken to mean strengthening the IGF and NRIs, which would be a good thing obviously.
Possibly, "strengthen" could be used instead of "build on", to clarify that is still about supporting the IGF, and not something else? Or is is better to live with the ambiguity in this case?
Paul.
On 28 Aug 2024, at 7:03, Fiona Alexander via wsis20 wrote:
Hi to all
Attached is GDC Rev 4 which has made it my way from a few different people this morning. I understand that like Rev 3 the draft was released under silence procedures. I don't have the details on the silence procedures deadline this time around, perhaps others do.
I'm still digesting the text but a quick assessment on the issues I have been most closely following:
* leans into ITU more on connectivity and bridging the digital divide;
* 2005 status quo on Internet governance (a pity in my view on the IGF funding challenge); * More caution on Digital Public Infrastructure; * The new AI panel and annual dialogue remain; * Follow up seems a bit more grounded in existing mechanisms and a GDC implementation map produced and linked to next year's WSIS +20; and,
* A proposal for creation of a new UN office remains and will go to the General Assembly meetings next month, presumably for approval.
Look forward to hearing others perspectives.
Fiona
_______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Sivasubramanian M Nameshop India. Internet@nameshop.in [image: Sent by a Verified Verified Inc. Sender] <https://wallet.verified.inc/authentication?referralCode=YQmHX1HBGdde>
participants (11)
-
AHM Bazlur Rahman -
Ana Neves -
Anna Karakhanyan -
Chris Buckridge -
Dr Jimson Olufuye -
Fiona Alexander -
Israel Rosas -
Kiki Fong Lim -
Paul Wilson -
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy -
Wolfgang Kleinwächter