Beretning

om

FN’s Verdenstopmøde om informationssamfundet

den 16.-18. november 2005

i Tunis, Tunesien

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UDENRIGSMINISTERIET

OG

MINISTERIET FOR VIDENSKAB, TEKNOLOGI OG UDVIKLING

 

Indhold:

 

Beretning om FN’s Verdenstopmøde om informationssamfundet den 16.-18. november 2005 i Tunis, Tunesien.

 

Bilag 1           Liste over deltagere i den danske delegation.

 

Bilag 2           The Tunis Commitment.

 

Bilag 3           The Tunis Agenda for the Information Society.

 

Bilag 4           Statement by His Excellency Mr. Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations.

 

Bilag 5           Statement by the Right Honourable Mr. Alun Michael, Minister of State for Industry and Regions, United Kingdom.

 

Bilag 6           Statement by Mr. Uffe Toudal Pedersen, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.

 

Bilag 7           Civil Society Statement on the World Summit on the Information Society: “Much more could have been achieved”.

Beretning

om

FN’s Verdenstopmøde om informationssamfundet

den 16.-18. november

i Tunis, Tunesien

 

Baggrund

FN’s generalforsamling gav den 21. december 2001 med resolution 56/183 Den Internationale Telekommunikation Union (ITU) til opgave at forberede et verdenstopmøde om informationssamfundet (World Summit on the Information Society – WSIS). Resolutionen pegede blandt andet på behovet for at udnytte det store videnmæssige og teknologiske potentiale til at fremme de mål, som blev fastsat i sluterklæringen fra FN’s Millenium-topmøde i New York i 2000. I resolutionen opfordredes såvel regeringer, civilsamfund og den private sektor til at deltage aktivt i forberedelsesprocessen.

 

WSIS skulle finde sted i to faser, hvor den første fase af topmødet fandt sted i Genève den 10.-12. december 2003, mens den anden fase fandt sted i Tunis den 16.-18. november 2005. Udenrigsministeriet og Videnskabsministeriet har i marts 2004 afgivet en beretning vedrørende topmødets første fase i Genève, hvorfor nærværende beretning kun omhandler anden fase af topmøde, som fandt sted i Tunis den 16.-18. november 2005.

 

Forberedelserne til topmødet i Tunis blev gennemført på regionalt og globalt niveau, ligesom der i mange lande også blev gennemført en national forberedelsesproces med relevante aktører indenfor området. Der har på globalt niveau været afholdt tre forberedelseskonferencer (PrepCom), hvoraf PrepCom 1 fandt sted i Hammamet i Tunesien i juni 2004, PrepCom 2 i Genève i februar 2005 samt PrepCom 3 i Genève i september 2005. Forberedelseskonferencerne har haft til opgave at forberede udkast til topmødets to slutdokumenter. Siden man imidlertid ikke kunne opnå enighed om udkast til slutdokumenter under den sidste forberedelseskonference i Genève i september 2005 blev konferencen genoptaget i Tunis den 13.-15. november 2005.

 

EU afgav skriftlige bidrag til forberedelsesprocessen forud for de afholdte forberedelseskonferencer, og den løbende EU-koordinering fandt som ved det forrige topmøde sted i Genève. Desuden har selve forberedelserne til topmødet løbende været på dagsordenen for it- og teleministrenes møder i Rådet. EU-kommissionen har i lighed med praksis i forbindelse med andre verdenstopmøder vedtaget flere meddelelser om anden del af WSIS til Rådet, Europa-Parlamentet, Det Europæiske Økonomiske og Sociale Udvalg og Regionsudvalget, senest den 2.juni 2005.[1]

 

Udenrigsministeriet og Videnskabsministeriet har været ansvarlige for de danske forberedelser til topmødet i Tunis, og der har været afholdt åbne debatmøder om WSIS den 11. november 2004 og den 14. september 2005 med henblik på at modtage input fra og skabe dialog med civilsamfundet, erhvervslivet, interesseorganisationer, forskningsverdenen, mediekredse og enkeltpersoner om emner for topmødet.

Forberedelsesprocessen for Verdenstopmødet og Informationssamfundet

 

Forberedelsesprocessen for Verdenstopmødet i Tunis blev gennemført under ledelse af den lettiske FN-ambassadør i Genève, ambassadør Janis Karklins. Det lykkedes ikke under den tredje forberedelseskonference i september 2005 at nå til enighed om et udkast til slutdokumenter for topmødet i Tunis, hvorfor det blev besluttet at suspendere forberedelseskonferencen i Genève og genoptage konferencen i Tunis den 13.-15. november 2005 umiddelbart inden topmødets begyndelse.

 

Derimod lykkedes det for den endelige forberedende konference i Tunis at nå til enighed om udkast til slutdokumenter natten inden topmødets påbegyndelse. Der opnåedes dog først enighed om de udviklingspolitiske og FN-relaterede emner efter, at der var fundet en tilfredsstillende løsning på topmødets hovedproblematik vedrørende den fremtidige konsultationsproces for en internationalisering af forvaltningen af internettet (Internet Governance).

 

Forvaltningen af internettet

 

I forhold til Internet Governance kom det til åben konflikt under PrepCom III i september 2005. Konflikten omhandlede primært et forslag om, at de særlige kontrolfunktioner vedrørende internettets basale infrastruktur, som i dag udøves unilateralt af de amerikanske myndigheder, skal overgå til et internationalt sammensat organ med afsæt i en mellemstatslig aftale.

 

Forslaget drejede sig blandt andet om principperne for den overordnede fordeling af IP-adresser, så der sikres en fair og effektiv fordeling af denne ressource. Forslaget tog tillige fat på problemstillingen vedrørende procedurerne for ændringer i den såkaldte ”root zone file” (den overordnede ”telefonbog”med basisoplysninger om identiteten på administratorer af topdomænenavne, der er afgørende for, at internettrafikken fungerer korrekt, og at man ved søgning på internettet finder den rigtige hjemmeside). Dette indebærer også principper for godkendelse af nye generiske topdomænenavne (som f.eks. ”.com” og ”.net”) samt af ændringer vedrørende administrationen af landetopdomænenavne (f.eks. ”.dk” og ”.de”). Herudover drejede det sig om ansvaret for det nødvendige beredskab, som skal sikre domænenavnssystemets centrale funktioner, om at få indført et internationalt voldgiftssystem til at løse konflikter samt om at fastsætte overordnede principper for administrationen af de ”root servers”, som sikrer den nødvendige identifikation i forbindelse med trafik på internettet.

 

Efter lange forhandlinger, der til tider afspejlede åben strid om de helt essentielle spørgsmål, endte den genoptagne forberedelseskonferencen imidlertid med, at der blev opnået enighed om en tekst, der i vid udstrækning bygger på forslag fra EU. Dette skyldes ikke mindst en enestående indsats af formanden for underkomiteen, ambassadør Kahn fra Pakistan.

 

Med den tekst, der blev opnået enighed om, fastslås det blandt andet, at alle regeringer skal deltage i forvaltningen på lige fod, at regeringerne er ansvarlige for fastlæggelsen af globale principper for opgavefordelingen mellem regeringerne og andre aktører og for, at internettet administreres i overensstemmelse med berettigede offentlige interesser og international ret. Endelig fastlægges rammerne for den proces, der skal føre til disse resultater. Aktørerne i denne proces bliver alle interessenter, og rammen om drøftelserne etableres i regi af relevante internationale og/eller mellemstatslige organisationer.

 

Derudover blev det vedtaget, at FN’s Generalsekretær skal nedsætte et ”multistakeholder-forum”, hvor de mere brede drøftelser vedrørende Internet Governance kan finde sted – med undtagelse af de spørgsmål, som relaterer direkte til forvaltningen af domænenavnssystemet.

 

Hvad angik de udviklingspolitiske og FN-relaterede emner udestod der under forberedelseskonferencen to hovedproblemer i udkast til topmødets slutdokumenter, som det ikke var lykkedes at løse under den langvarige forudgående forhandlingsproces i Genève i september 2005.

 

Forholdet mellem menneskerettigheder og statssuverænitet

EU og WEOG-landene[2] USA, Canada, Schweiz og Norge modsatte sig diverse tekstforslag fra Rusland, støttet af G-77-landene[3] (særligt den arabiske og den asiatiske gruppe), om at underordne basale frihedsrettigheder nationalstaters kontrol med henvisning til bl.a. sikkerhedsbehov. Også spørgsmålet om pressefrihed blev genstand for forsøg på udvanding fra særligt russisk side, men også hér lykkedes det for EU m.fl. at forhandle acceptabelt sprogbrug ind i dokumentet.

 

Implementering og opfølgning af WSIS processen

Den primære uenighed vedrørende implementering og opfølgning på WSIS processen var koncentreret omkring, hvem der skulle have det overordnede ansvar for implementeringen og opfølgningen på det officielle WSIS-resultat fra Tunis. Rusland støttet af bl.a. G-77-landene havde hele tiden ønsket at give International Telecommunication Union (ITU) en klar overordnet koordinerende rolle i forbindelse med implementeringen og opfølgningen på WSIS, hvilket et dominerende flertal indenfor EU og WEOG-landene imidlertid ikke ønskede, da man hellere så implementeringen og opfølgningen på WSIS integreret i FN’s normale opfølgningsprocesser, herunder mainstreamed indenfor de enkelt FN-organisationerne i henhold til deres mandat og kompetenceområde. EU-holdningen var, at FN’s Generalsekretær selv måtte tage den endelige beslutning herom og ikke påvirkes i den ene eller anden retning.

 

Forhandlingerne i Tunis afspejlede den klassiske nord-syd polarisering, hvor et hårdt presset EU i elvte time, konfronteret med truslen om forhandlingssammenbrud, måtte acceptere et kompromissprog, som langt fra var optimalt, men som dog fortsat var acceptabelt.

 

På positivsiden talte, at det lykkedes EU at få adresseret, at der ikke var behov for at skabe nye operationelle enheder, men at opfølgningen skulle følge FN’s normale procedure for opfølgning på topmøder. Dertil kom, at det lykkedes at skabe en klar opdeling mellem aktørerne for henholdsvis implementering og opfølgning samt at etablere en kobling mellem WSIS processen og 2015-målene. EU havde endvidere held med at få indplaceret implementeringsspørgs-målet i FN's eksisterende øverste bestyrelse ”Chief Executive Board”.

 

På negativsiden talte, at G-77-landene fik held med at få oprettet en særlig gruppe om informationssamfundet under FN’s eksisterende ”Chief Executive Board”, samt at udpegning af formand herfor burde ske med behørig hensyntagen til ITU, UNESCO og UNDP, hvilket man fra EU’s side ikke på forhånd ønskede at lægge sig fast på. Ligeledes lykkedes det Rusland og G-77-landene at få opbakning til et anneks i det operationelle afsnit med identifikation af ledende FN-organisationer med hensyn til den under WSIS topmødet i Genève vedtagne handlingsplan, hvilket man fra EU’s side heller ikke ønskede at lægge sig fast på. I slutdokumentets anneks figurerer FN (sær)organisationer som ITU, UNESCO, UNCTAD samt delvist UNDP prominent. Det lykkedes imidlertid for EU at få indsat en henvisning til, at annekset alene var indikativt, samt at der kun blev udpeget mulige facilitatorer  og moderatorer. Dertil kom en udspecificering af ”multi-stakeholder” tilgangen i annekset med henblik på at sikre inddragelse af privatsektor og civilsamfund.

 

For så vidt angik spørgsmålet om opfølgning lykkedes det G-77-landene at få denne placeret i Kommissionen for Videnskab og Teknologi under ECOSOC, baseret på en kommende ECOSOC beslutning i 2006 om revideret mandat for og sammensætning af kommissionen. Fra EU’s side kunne der ikke fremsættes et konkret alternativ hertil, hvorfor dette måtte accepteres. Endelig lykkedes det G-77-landene at fastholde behovet for et generelt ”review” af implementering af WSIS i 2015, om end EU havde held med at få afvist en mere formaliseret og automatisk opfølgningsproces.

 

Finansielle spørgsmål

Foruden de to ovennævnte centrale hovedproblemstillinger omfattede drøftelserne også finansielle spørgsmål. Forhandlingerne vedrørende de finansielle mekanismer tog udgangspunkt i en tekst udarbejdet af en arbejdsgruppe under formanden (Group Friends of the Chair), som var skrevet på baggrund af konklusionerne fra en UNDP arbejdsgruppe-rapport om de finansielle mekanismer. Rapporten understregede, at udviklingslandene burde indarbejde informations- og kommunikationsteknologier (IKT) i modtagerlandenes fattigdomsstrategier samt udarbejde nationale IKT-strategier. Det fremgik ligeledes af rapporten, at der i arbejdsgruppen ikke kunne opnås enighed om, hvorvidt der ville være behov for en særlig finansieringsmekanisme eller et forum til mobilisering af ressourcer til udvikling af informationssamfundet i udviklingslandene.

 

Fra EU’s side holdt man fast i, at der ikke var behov for oprettelse af nye, særlige finansieringsmekanismer på IKT-området, men at man derimod skulle lægger vægt på, at IKT blev integreret via de eksisterende bistandsmekanismer, og at vurderingen af finansieringsbehovet til sektoren skulle indgå i modtagerlandenes samlede planlægning af de nationale budgetter, herunder i landenes fattigdomsstrategier. Det lykkedes for EU at fastholde, at den i Genève færdigforhandlede tekst vedrørende finansielle mekanismer blev baseret på frivillighedsaspektet, herunder at teksten fra topmødet i Genève vedrørende den frivillige Digitale Solidaritetsfond ikke blev genåbnet, som ønsket fra udviklingslandenes side.

 

Verdenstopmødets slutdokumenter

Den genoptagne PrepCom 3 sluttede ved midnat den 15. november 2005 efter tre dages intensive forhandlinger og således inden den officielle åbning af Verdenstopmødet om Informationssamfundet dagen efter. Det lykkedes dog først at nå til enighed om de beskrevne udestående tekstafsnit efter, at der som beskrevet var fundet en tilfredsstillende løsning på topmødets hovedproblematik om den fremtidige internationale forvaltning af internettet.

 

Udviklingslandenes gidselstagning af de beskrevne udestående problemstillinger, særligt for så vidt angik menneskerettigheder samt spørgsmålet om implementering af og opfølgning på WSIS processen, viste sig at være en effektiv strategi. Det endelige resultat på FN- og udviklingsbistandsområdet vurderedes derfor at være et i sidste instans for Danmark og EU acceptabelt kompromis, som ”tillæg” til topmødets hovedresultat vedrørende internettet.

 

De under PrepCom 3 færdigforhandlede udkast til topmøde slutdokumenter, omfattede ”Tunis Commitment” (introduktionen) og ”Tunis Agenda for the Information Society” (det operationelle afsnit), blev godkendt uden ændringer under topmødet den 18. november 2005. Topmøde slut dokumenterne er vedlagt som henholdsvis bilag 2 og 3.

 

Den danske delegation

Departementschef Uffe Toudal Pedersen fra Ministeriet for Videnskab, Teknologi og Udvikling ledede under sin deltagelse i topmødet den 16.-18. november 2005 den danske delegation og afgav det danske indlæg. Delegationen omfattede tillige medlemmer fra Folketinget, repræsentanter fra Udenrigsministeriet og Ministeriet for Videnskab, Teknologi og Udvikling samt det danske civilsamfund. Delegationslisten er vedlagt som bilag 1.

 

Den generelle debat under topmødet

FN’s Generalsekretær, Kofi Annan, anførte bl.a. i sit indledende indlæg, at Verdenstopmødet i Tunis gerne skulle føre til, at IKT-teknologier blev anvendt på nye måde, således at de medførte yderligere sociale fordele for alle klasse i verdenssamfundet. Mest af alt burde topmødet generere nyt momentum for de fattigste landes økonomiske og sociale udvikling. Forudsætningen for informationssamfundet var imidlertid frihed. Det var denne frihed som gjorde det muligt for journalister at arbejde samt for borger at tilegne sig den nødvendige viden til bl.a. at holde regeringerne ansvarlige for deres handlinger. Uden åbenhed og retten til at søge, modtage og videreformidle information og ideer gennem medier uden hensyn til grænser ville informationssamfundet være dødfødt.

FN-systemet var rede til at hjælpe med implementeringen af topmødets resultater, herunder vedrørende internettet. Imidlertid skulle der ikke være nogen tvivl om, at FN ikke var interesseret i at overtage eller føre opsyn med forvaltningen af internettet. USA skulle have en stor tak for at have udviklet internettet og gjort det tilgængelig for verden, men det stod klart for alle, at der i dag eksisterede et behov for yderligere international deltagelse i diskussionen omkring forvaltningen af internettet.         

Det britiske EU-formandskab repræsenteret ved den britiske Minister for Industri og regionerne, Alun Michael, anførte bl.a. i et indlæg på vegne af EU, at EU hilste forhandlingsresultatet velkommen. Tunis-dagsordenen var et vigtig bidrag til den globale anstrengelse med at bygge bro over den digitale kløft, således at man sikrede, at fordelene ved IKT kunne komme alle til gode. EU så frem til at samarbejde med alle aktører, således at man sikrede en fuldstændig og effektiv implementering af begge faser af Verdenstopmødet om Informationssamfundet.

EU var verdens største donor, men på trods heraf havde man besluttet at fordoble sit budget til udviklingsbistand inden år 2010. En stigende andel af EU’s udviklingsbistand blev givet som budgetstøtte til udviklingslandenes egne udviklingsplaner og budgetter, således at landene selv kunne bestemme, hvor meget som skulle gå til IKT.         

Departementschef Uffe Toudal Pedersen understregede bl.a. i sit indlæg, at IKT i dag var den mest kraftfulde og effektive katalysator i verden, hvilket gjaldt for både rige som fattige lande. IKT var nøglen til at stimulere bæredygtig økonomisk udvikling og forbedring af menneskers livskvalitet overalt i verden. Endvidere gjorde IKT det muligt for den enkelte at tage et større medansvar for sit liv og deltage aktivt i samfundsudviklingen, hvorved man også forbedrede demokratisering og menneskerettigheder. Verdenstopmødet var af vital betydning, hvis man ønskede at sprede de positive fordele og muligheder ved IKT til alle verdenshjørner.

 

I denne forbindelse var forvaltningen af internettet nok topmødets vigtigste emneområde. Danmark var af den overbevisning, at den private sektor og civilsamfundet skulle vedblive med at have en førerrolle i udviklingen af internettet. Derfor var det vigtigt, at man fandt en sand måde at sikre legitimiteten af forvaltningen af internettet på. Løsningen var et forvaltningssystem på internationalt niveau, som ikke kunne introducere nogen form for indholdskontrol med internettet, og som samtidigt kunne beskytte kernen af internettets infrastruktur.

 

Alle parter burde også arbejde hårdere for at sikre ytringsfriheden, som var informationssamfundets mest vitale byggesten. Lande som ikke forstod dette princip ville i det lange løb tabe i den globale konkurrence om investeringer og økonomisk udvikling. Hvert land burde derfor sætte udviklingen af informationssamfundet høj på den nationale dagsorden. Udviklingslandene havde specielt behov for at integrere deres nationale e-strategier i landenes fattigdomsstrategier.

 

Den danske stand

Danmark deltog med en stand på den åbne platform ICT4all (ICT for All) i forbindelse med Verdenstopmødet i Tunis. ICT4all tiltrak ca. 38.000 besøgende gæster i løbet af de fem dage, som arrangementet varede. 296 udstillende organisationer fra mere end 65 lande var tilstede på platformen, hvor informations- og kommunikationsteknologiernes udviklingsperspektiver blev drøftet og belyst gennem hundredvis af rundbordsdiskussioner, foredrag og konferencer.

 

Danmark var repræsenteret på platformen med 12 deltagere fra 5 danske virksomheder samt Udenrigsministeriet, som redegjorde for ministeriets nye portal for integreringen af IKT i udviklingsbistanden. Departementschef Uffe Toudal Pedersen var vært ved standens åbningsreception, hvori deltog repræsentanter fra tilrejsende delegationer samt en lang række udenlandske organisationer.

 

FN-forbundet i Danmark koordinerede i samarbejde med den internationale sammenslutning af FN-forbund (WFUNA) det danske civilsamfunds repræsentation på ICT4all, hvor man havde en fælles stand. FN-forbundet havde med økonomisk støtte fra Udenrigsministeriet inviteret samarbejdspartnere fra civilsamfundet i seks udviklingslande til at repræsentere deres lande på ICT4all. Standen var godt besøgt, og der var især stor interesse for de nye muligheder for global kommunikation, som blev præsenteret.

 

 

Pressedækning og formidling

I forbindelse med Verdenstopmødet og standen deltog journalister fra danske medier. Som del af de danske forberedelser til ICT4all blev der oprettet en hjemmeside (www.ict4all.dk), hvor information om Verdenstopmødet og den tilknyttede platform blev formidlet til de danske deltagere. Samtidig fungerede hjemmesiden som kommunikationsredskab mellem deltagerne i perioden frem mod topmødet. Under selve afviklingen af topmødet og ICT4all-platformen var hjemmesiden kernen til formidling og overblik, og hjemmesiden vil forblive tilgængelig i seks måneder efter topmødet.

 

Civilsamfundets erklæring til WSIS-topmødet

Under første fase af WSIS formulerede de deltagende civilsamfundsorganisationer en særskilt deklaration, som siden blev annekteret til den officielle Genève Deklaration. Denne deklaration havde til hensigt at give civilsamfundets sammenhængende bud på fremtidens informationssamfund, udover de forslag der blev inkorporeret i den officielle erklæring.
 
Under topmødets anden fase i Tunis arbejdede civilsamfundsorganisationerne med at formulere en særskilt erklæring, der supplerede deklarationen fra Geneve og som særligt gjorde status over civilsamfundets arbejde og rolle i den forgangne proces, civilsamfundets fremtidige rolle samt de opnåede tiltag. På grund af en meget hektisk optaktsfase og ikke mindst på grund af sværere arbejdsvilkår for civilsamfundet under Tunis-topmødet, blev erklæringen ikke færdigarbejdet under selve topmødet. Civilsamfundets erklæringen blev derfor først færdigudarbejdet og offentliggjort ultimo december 2005 under titlen ”Much more could have been achieved”. Erklæringen vedlægges som bilag 7.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilag 1:

 

Liste over deltagere i den danske delegation

 

Mr Uffe Toudal PEDERSEN, Permanent Secretary, Delegation of Denmark

Mr Finn JØNCK, Head of Department, Delegation of Denmark

Ms Marianne ROENNEBAEK, Deputy Permanent Secretary, Delegation of Denmark

H.E. Mr Bo Eric WEBER, Ambassador, Delegation of Denmark

Ms Sidse AEGIDIUS, Head of Department, Delegation of Denmark, [email protected]

Ms Karen Munk CHRISTENSEN, Head of Secretariat of the Committee on Science and Technology, Delegation of Denmark

Ms Jane FINNERUP JOHNSEN, Project-coordinator, Delegation of Denmark

Ms Rikke FRANK JØRGENSEN, Special Advisor, Delegation of Denmark

Ms Maj HESSEL, First Secretary, Delegation of Denmark

Mr Magnus HEUNICKE, Member of Parliament, Delegation of Denmark

Mr Henrik KJAER, Special Adviser, Delegation of Denmark

Mr Torben KROGH, Chairman, Delegation of Denmark

Mr Martin MIKKELSEN, Head of Section, Delegation of Denmark

Mr Torsten Schack PEDERSEN, Member of Parliament, Delegation of Denmark

Ms Kirstine SCHJERMER, Web Coordinator, Delegation of Denmark

Mr Jørgen TRANBERG, Minister Counsellor, Delegation of Denmark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilag 2:

 

TUNIS COMMITMENT

 

1.                   We, the representatives of the peoples of the world, have gathered in Tunis from 16‑18 November 2005 for this second phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) to reiterate our unequivocal support for the Geneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action adopted at the first phase of the World Summit on the Information Society in Geneva in December 2003.

2. We reaffirm our desire and commitment to build a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society, premised on the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and multilateralism, and respecting fully and upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, so that people everywhere can create, access, utilize and share information and knowledge, to achieve their full potential and to attain the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.

3. We reaffirm the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, as enshrined in the Vienna Declaration. We also reaffirm that democracy, sustainable development, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as good governance at all levels are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. We further resolve to strengthen respect for the rule of law in international as in national affairs.

4. We reaffirm paragraphs 4, 5 and 55 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles. We recognize that freedom of expression and the free flow of information, ideas, and knowledge, are essential for the Information Society and beneficial to development.

5.                   The Tunis Summit represents a unique opportunity to raise awareness of the benefits that Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) can bring to humanity and the manner in which they can transform people’s activities, interaction and lives, and thus increase confidence in the future.

6. This Summit is an important stepping-stone in the world’s efforts to eradicate poverty and to attain the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals. By the Geneva decisions, we established a coherent long-term link between the WSIS process, and other relevant major United Nations conferences and summits. We call upon governments, private sector, civil society and international organizations to join together to implement the commitments set forth in the Geneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action. In this context, the outcomes of the recently concluded 2005 World Summit on the review of the implementation of the Millennium Declaration are of special relevance.

7. We reaffirm the commitments made in Geneva and build on them in Tunis by focusing on financial mechanisms for bridging the digital divide, on Internet governance and related issues, as well as on follow-up and implementation of the Geneva and Tunis decisions, as referenced in the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society.

8. While reaffirming the important roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders as outlined in paragraph 3 of the Geneva Plan of Action, we acknowledge the key role and responsibilities of governments in the WSIS process.

9. We reaffirm our resolution in the quest to ensure that everyone can benefit from the opportunities that ICTs can offer, by recalling that governments, as well as private sector, civil society and the United Nations and other international organizations, should work together to: improve access to information and communication infrastructure and technologies as well as to information and knowledge; build capacity; increase confidence and security in the use of ICTs; create an enabling environment at all levels; develop and widen ICT applications; foster and respect cultural diversity; recognize the role of the media; address the ethical dimensions of the Information Society; and encourage international and regional cooperation. We confirm that these are the key principles for building an inclusive Information Society, the elaboration of which is found in the Geneva Declaration of Principles.

10. We recognize that access to information and sharing and creation of knowledge contributes significantly to strengthening economic, social and cultural development, thus helping all countries to reach the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals. This process can be enhanced by removing barriers to universal, ubiquitous, equitable and affordable access to information. We underline the importance of removing barriers to bridging the digital divide, particularly those that hinder the full achievement of the economic, social and cultural development of countries and the welfare of their people, in particular, in developing countries.

11. Furthermore, ICTs are making it possible for a vastly larger population than at any time in the past to join in sharing and expanding the base of human knowledge, and contributing to its further growth in all spheres of human endeavour as well as its application to education, health and science. ICTs have enormous potential to expand access to quality education, to boost literacy and universal primary education, and to facilitate the learning process itself, thus laying the groundwork for the establishment of a fully inclusive and development-oriented Information Society and knowledge economy which respects cultural and linguistic diversity.

12. We emphasize that the adoption of ICTs by enterprises plays a fundamental role in economic growth. The growth and productivity enhancing effects of well-implemented investments in ICTs can lead to increased trade and to more and better employment. For this reason, both enterprise development and labour market policies play a fundamental role in the adoption of ICTs. We invite governments and the private sector to enhance the capacity of Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), since they furnish the greatest number of jobs in most economies. We shall work together, with all stakeholders, to put in place the necessary policy, legal and regulatory frameworks that foster entrepreneurship, particularly for SMMEs.

13. We also recognize that the ICT revolution can have a tremendous positive impact as an instrument of sustainable development. In addition, an appropriate enabling environment at national and international levels could prevent increasing social and economic divisions, and the widening of the gap between rich and poor countries, regions, and individuals—including between men and women.

14.                 We also recognize that in addition to building ICT infrastructure, there should be adequate emphasis on developing human capacity and creating ICT applications and digital content in local language, where appropriate, so as to ensure a comprehensive approach to building a global Information Society.

15.                 Recognizing the principles of universal and non-discriminatory access to ICTs for all nations, the need to take into account the level of social and economic development of each country, and respecting the development-oriented aspects of the Information Society, we underscore that ICTs are effective tools to promote peace, security and stability, to enhance democracy, social cohesion, good governance and the rule of law, at national, regional and international levels. ICTs can be used to promote economic growth and enterprise development. Infrastructure development, human capacity building, information security and network security are critical to achieve these goals. We further recognize the need to effectively confront challenges and threats resulting from use of ICTs for purposes that are inconsistent with objectives of maintaining international stability and security and may adversely affect the integrity of the infrastructure within States, to the detriment of their security. It is necessary to prevent the abuse of information resources and technologies for criminal and terrorist purposes, while respecting human rights.

16.     We further commit ourselves to evaluate and follow up progress in bridging the digital divide, taking into account different levels of development, so as to reach internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, and to assess the effectiveness of investment and international cooperation efforts in building the Information Society.

17.     We urge governments, using the potential of ICTs, to create public systems of information on laws and regulations, envisaging a wider development of public access points and supporting the broad availability of this information.

18.                 We shall strive unremittingly, therefore, to promote universal, ubiquitous, equitable and affordable access to ICTs, including universal design and assistive technologies, for all people, especially those with disabilities, everywhere, to ensure that the benefits are more evenly distributed between and within societies, and to bridge the digital divide in order to create digital opportunities for all and benefit from the potential offered by ICTs for development.

19.                 The international community should take necessary measures to ensure that all countries of the world have equitable and affordable access to ICTs, so that their benefits in the fields of socio-economic development and bridging the digital divide are truly inclusive.

20.                 To that end, we shall pay particular attention to the special needs of marginalized and vulnerable groups of society including migrants, internally displaced persons and refugees, unemployed and underprivileged people, minorities and nomadic people, older persons and persons with disabilities.

21.                 To that end, we shall pay special attention to the particular needs of people of developing countries, countries with economies in transition, Least Developed Countries, Small Island Developing States, Landlocked Developing Countries, Highly Indebted Poor Countries, countries and territories under occupation, and countries recovering from conflict or natural disasters.

22.                 In the evolution of the Information Society, particular attention must be given to the special situation of indigenous peoples, as well as to the preservation of their heritage and their cultural legacy.

23.                 We recognize that a gender divide exists as part of the digital divide in society and we reaffirm our commitment to women’s empowerment and to a gender equality perspective, so that we can overcome this divide. We further acknowledge that the full participation of women in the Information Society is necessary to ensure the inclusiveness and respect for human rights within the Information Society. We encourage all stakeholders to support women’s participation in decision-making processes and to contribute to shaping all spheres of the Information Society at international, regional and national levels.

24.                 We recognize the role of ICTs in the protection of children and in enhancing the development of children. We will strengthen action to protect children from abuse and defend their rights in the context of ICTs. In that context, we emphasize that the best interests of the child are a primary consideration.

25.                 We reaffirm our commitment to empowering young people as key contributors to building an inclusive Information Society. We will actively engage youth in innovative ICT-based development programmes and widen opportunities for youth to be involved in e-strategy processes.

26.                 We recognize the importance of creative content and applications to overcome the digital divide and to contribute to the achievement of the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.

27.                 We recognize that equitable and sustainable access to information requires the implementation of strategies for the long-term preservation of the digital information that is being created.

28.                 We reaffirm our desire to build ICT networks and develop applications, in partnership with the private sector, based on open or interoperable standards that are affordable and accessible to all, available anywhere and anytime, to anyone and on any device, leading to a ubiquitous network.

29.     Our conviction is that governments, the private sector, civil society, the scientific and academic community, and users can utilize various technologies and licensing models, including those developed under proprietary schemes and those developed under open-source and free modalities, in accordance with their interests and with the need to have reliable services and implement effective programmes for their people. Taking into account the importance of proprietary software in the markets of the countries, we reiterate the need to encourage and foster collaborative development, interoperative platforms and free and open-source software, in ways that reflect the possibilities of different software models, notably for education, science and digital inclusion programmes.

30.                 Recognizing that disaster mitigation can significantly support efforts to bring about sustainable development and help in poverty reduction, we reaffirm our commitment to leveraging ICT capabilities and potential through fostering and strengthening cooperation at the national, regional, and international levels.

31.                 We commit ourselves to work together towards the implementation of the Digital Solidarity Agenda, as agreed in paragraph 27 of the Geneva Plan of Action. The full and quick implementation of that agenda, observing good governance at all levels, requires in particular a timely, effective, comprehensive and durable solution to the debt problems of developing countries where appropriate, a universal, rule-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system, that can also stimulate development worldwide, benefiting countries at all stages of development, as well as, to seek and effectively implement concrete international approaches and mechanisms to increase international cooperation and assistance to bridge the digital divide.

32.                 We further commit ourselves to promote the inclusion of all peoples in the Information Society through the development and use of local and/or indigenous languages in ICTs. We will continue our efforts to protect and promote cultural diversity, as well as cultural identities, within the Information Society.

33.                 We acknowledge that, while technical cooperation can help, capacity building at all levels is needed to ensure that the required institutional and individual expertise is available.

34.                 We recognize the need for, and strive to mobilize resources, both human and financial, in accordance with chapter two of the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, to enable us to increase the use of ICT for development and realize the short-, medium- and long-term plans dedicated to building the Information Society as follow-up and implementation of the outcomes of WSIS.

35.                 We recognize the central role of public policy in setting the framework in which resource mobilization can take place.

36.                 We value the potential of ICTs to promote peace and to prevent conflict which, inter alia, negatively affects achieving development goals. ICTs can be used for identifying conflict situations through early-warning systems preventing conflicts, promoting their peaceful resolution, supporting humanitarian action, including protection of civilians in armed conflicts, facilitating peacekeeping missions, and assisting post conflict peace-building and reconstruction.

37.     We are convinced that our goals can be accomplished through the involvement, cooperation and partnership of governments and other stakeholders, i.e. the private sector, civil society and international organizations, and that international cooperation and solidarity at all levels are indispensable if the fruits of the Information Society are to benefit all.

38.                 Our efforts should not stop with the conclusion of the Summit. The emergence of the global Information Society to which we all contribute provides increasing opportunities for all our peoples and for an inclusive global community that were unimaginable only a few years ago. We must harness these opportunities today and support their further development and progress.

39.                 We reaffirm our strong resolve to develop and implement an effective and sustainable response to the challenges and opportunities of building a truly global Information Society that benefits all our peoples.

40.                 We strongly believe in the full and timely implementation of the decisions we took in Geneva and Tunis, as outlined in the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society.

_________

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilag 3:

 

 

TUNIS AGENDA FOR THE INFORMATION SOCIETY

Introduction

1.                   We recognize that it is now time to move from principles to action, considering the work already being done in implementing the Geneva Plan of Action and identifying those areas where progress has been made, is being made, or has not taken place.

2.                   We reaffirm the commitments made in Geneva and build on them in Tunis by focusing on financial mechanisms for bridging the digital divide, on Internet governance and related issues, as well as on implementation and follow-up of the Geneva and Tunis decisions.

Financial mechanisms for meeting the challenges of
ICT for development

3.                   We thank the UN Secretary-General for his efforts in creating the Task Force on Financial Mechanisms (TFFM) and we commend the members on their report.

4.                   We recall that the mandate of the TFFM was to undertake a thorough review of the adequacy of existing financial mechanisms in meeting the challenges of ICT for development.

5.                   The TFFM report sets out the complexity of existing mechanisms, both private and public, which provide financing for ICTs in developing countries. It identifies areas where these could be improved and where ICTs could be given higher priority by developing countries and their development partners.

6.                   Based on the conclusion of the review of the report, we have considered the improvements and innovations of financial mechanisms, including the creation of a voluntary Digital Solidarity Fund, as mentioned in the Geneva Declaration of Principles.

7.                   We recognize the existence of the digital divide and the challenges that this poses for many countries, which are forced to choose between many competing objectives in their development planning and in demands for development funds whilst having limited resources.

8.                   We recognize the scale of the problem in bridging the digital divide, which will require adequate and sustainable investments in ICT infrastructure and services, and capacity building, and transfer of technology over many years to come.

9.                   We call upon the international community to promote the transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, including ICTs, to adopt policies and programmes with a view to assisting developing countries to take advantage of technology in their pursuit of development through, inter alia, technical cooperation and the building of scientific and technological capacity in our efforts to bridge the digital and development divides.

10.                 We recognize that the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, are fundamental. The Monterrey Consensus on Financing for Development is the basis for the pursuit of adequate and appropriate financial mechanisms to promote ICT for development, in accordance with the Digital Solidarity Agenda of the Geneva Plan of Action.

11.                 We recognize and acknowledge the special and specific funding needs of the developing world, as referred to in paragraph 16 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles*, which faces numerous challenges in the ICT sector, and that there is strong need to focus on their special financing needs to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.

12.                 We agree that the financing of ICT for development needs to be placed in the context of the growing importance of the role of ICTs, not only as a medium of communication, but also as a development enabler, and as a tool for the achievement of the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.

13.                 In the past, financing of ICT infrastructure in most developing countries has been based on public investment. Lately, a significant influx of investment has taken place where private-sector participation has been encouraged, based on a sound regulatory framework, and where public policies aimed at bridging the digital divide have been implemented.

14.                 We are greatly encouraged by the fact that advances in communication technology, and high-speed data networks are continuously increasing the possibilities for developing countries, and countries with economies in transition, to participate in the global market for ICT-enabled services on the basis of their comparative advantage. These emerging opportunities provide a powerful commercial basis for ICT infrastructural investment in these countries. Therefore, governments should take action, in the framework of national development policies, in order to support an enabling and competitive environment for the necessary investment in ICT infrastructure and for the development of new services. At the same time, countries should pursue policies and measures that would not discourage, impede or prevent the continued participation of these countries in the global market for ICT-enabled services.

15.                 We take note that the challenges for expanding the scope of useful accessible information content in the developing world are numerous; in particular, the issue of financing for various forms of content and applications requires new attention, as this area has often been overlooked by the focus on ICT infrastructure.

16.                 We recognize that attracting investment in ICTs has depended crucially upon an enabling environment, including good governance at all levels, and a supportive, transparent and pro-competitive policy and regulatory framework, reflecting national realities.

17.                 We endeavour to engage in a proactive dialogue on matters related to corporate social responsibility and good corporate governance of transnational corporations and their contribution to the economic and social development of developing countries in our efforts to bridge the digital divide.

18.                 We underline that market forces alone cannot guarantee the full participation of developing countries in the global market for ICT-enabled services. Therefore, we encourage the strengthening of international cooperation and solidarity aimed at enabling all countries, especially those referred to in paragraph 16 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles, to develop ICT infrastructure and ICT-enabled services that are viable and competitive at national and international levels.

19.                 We recognize that, in addition to the public sector, financing of ICT infrastructure by the private sector has come to play an important role in many countries and that domestic financing is being augmented by North-South flows and South-South cooperation.

20.                 We recognize that, as a result of the growing impact of sustainable private-sector investment in infrastructure, multilateral and bilateral public donors are redirecting public resources to other development objectives, including Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers and related programmes, policy reforms and mainstreaming of ICTs and capacity development. We encourage all governments to give appropriate priority to ICTs, including traditional ICTs such as broadcast radio and television, in their national development strategies. We also encourage multilateral institutions as well as bilateral public donors to consider also providing more financial support for regional and large-scale national ICT infrastructure projects and related capacity development. They should consider aligning their aid and partnership strategies with the priorities set by developing countries and countries with economies in transition in their national development strategies including their poverty reduction strategies.

21.                 We recognize that public finance plays a crucial role in providing ICT access and services to rural areas and disadvantaged populations including those in Small Island Developing States and Landlocked Developing Countries.

22.                 We note that ICT-related capacity-building needs represent a high priority in all developing countries and the current financing levels have not been adequate to meet the needs, although there are many different funding mechanisms supporting ICTs for development.

23.                 We recognize that there are a number of areas in need of greater financial resources and where current approaches to ICT for development financing have devoted insufficient attention to date. These include:

a)     ICT capacity-building programmes, materials, tools, educational funding and specialized training initiatives, especially for regulators and other public-sector employees and organizations.

b)                Communications access and connectivity for ICT services and applications in remote rural areas, Small Island Developing States, Landlocked Developing Countries and other locations presenting unique technological and market challenges.

c)                 Regional backbone infrastructure, regional networks, Network Access Points and related regional projects, to link networks across borders and in economically disadvantaged regions which may require coordinated policies including legal, regulatory and financial frameworks, and seed financing, and would benefit from sharing experiences and best practices.

d)                Broadband capacity to facilitate the delivery of a broader range of services and applications, promote investment and provide Internet access at affordable prices to both existing and new users.

e)                 Coordinated assistance, as appropriate, for countries referred to in paragraph 16 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles, particularly Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States, in order to improve effectiveness and to lower transaction costs associated with the delivery of international donor support.

f)                  ICT applications and content aimed at the integration of ICTs into the implementation of poverty eradication strategies and in sector programmes, particularly in health, education, agriculture and the environment.

In addition, there is a need to consider the following other issues, which are relevant to ICT for development and which have not received adequate attention:

g)    Sustainability of Information Society related projects, for example the maintenance of ICT infrastructure.

h)    Special needs of Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), such as funding requirements.

i)      Local development and manufacturing of ICT applications and technologies by developing countries.

j)       Activities on ICT-related institutional reform and enhanced capacity on legal and regulatory framework.

k)    Improving organizational structures and business-process change aimed at optimizing the impact and effectiveness of ICT projects and other projects with significant ICT components;

l)       Local government and initiatives based in local communities that deliver ICT services to communities in areas such as education, health and livelihood support.

24.                 Recognizing that the central responsibility for coordination of public financing programmes and public ICT development initiatives rests with governments, we recommend that further cross-sectoral and cross-institutional coordination should be undertaken, both on the part of donors and recipients within the national framework.

25.                 Multilateral development banks and institutions should consider adapting their existing mechanisms, and where appropriate designing new ones, to provide for national and regional demands on ICT development.

26.                 We acknowledge the following prerequisites for equitable and universal accessibility to, and better utilization of, financial mechanisms:

a)     Creating policy and regulatory incentives aimed at universal access and the attraction of private-sector investment.

b)    Identification and acknowledgement of the key role of ICTs in national development strategies, and their elaboration, when appropriate, in conjunction with e-strategies.

c)     Developing institutional and implementation capacity to support the use of national universal service/access funds, and further study of these mechanisms and those aiming to mobilize domestic resources.

d)    Encouraging the development of locally relevant information, applications and services that will benefit developing countries and countries with economies in transition.

e)     Supporting the “scaling-up” of successful ICT-based pilot programmes.

f)      Supporting the use of ICTs in government as a priority and crucial target area for ICT-based development interventions.

g)    Building human resource and institutional capacity (knowledge) at every level for achieving Information Society objectives, especially in the public sector.

h)    Encouraging business-sector entities to help jump-start wider demand for ICT services by supporting creative industries, local producers of cultural content and applications as well as small businesses.

i)      Strengthening capacities to enhance the potential of securitized funds and utilizing them effectively.

27.                 We recommend improvements and innovations in existing financing mechanisms, including:

a)                          Improving financial mechanisms to make financial resources become adequate, more predictable, preferably untied, and sustainable.

b)                          Enhancing regional cooperation and creating multi-stakeholder partnerships, especially by creating incentives for building regional backbone infrastructure.

c)                          Providing affordable access to ICTs, by the following measures:

i.       reducing international Internet costs charged by backbone providers, supporting, inter alia, the creation and development of regional ICT backbones and Internet Exchange Points to reduce interconnection cost and broaden network access;

ii.   encouraging ITU to continue the study of the question of International Internet Connectivity (IIC) as an urgent matter to develop appropriate Recommendations.

d)     Coordinating programmes among governments and major financial players to mitigate investment risks and transaction costs for operators entering less attractive rural and low-income market segments.

e)     Helping to accelerate the development of domestic financial instruments, including by supporting local microfinance instruments, ICT business incubators, public credit instruments, reverse auction mechanisms, networking initiatives based on local communities, digital solidarity and other innovations.

f)       Improving the ability to access financing facilities with a view to accelerating the pace of financing of ICT infrastructure and services, including the promotion of North-South flows as well as North-South and South-South cooperation.

g)     Multilateral, regional and bilateral development organizations should consider the utility of creating a virtual forum for the sharing of information by all stakeholders on potential projects, on sources of financing and on institutional financial mechanisms.

h)     Enabling developing countries to be increasingly able to generate funds for ICTs and to develop financial instruments, including trust funds and seed capital adapted to their economies.

i)       Urging all countries to make concrete efforts to fulfil their commitments under the Monterrey Consensus.

j)       Multilateral, regional and bilateral development organizations should consider cooperating to enhance their capacity to provide rapid response with a view to supporting developing countries that request assistance with respect to ICT policies;

k)     Encouraging increased voluntary contributions.

l)       Making, as appropriate, effective use of debt relief mechanisms as outlined in the Geneva Plan of Action, including inter alia debt cancellation and debt swapping, that may be used for financing ICT for development projects, including those within the framework of Poverty Reduction Strategies.

28.                 We welcome the Digital Solidarity Fund (DSF) established in Geneva as an innovative financial mechanism of a voluntary nature open to interested stakeholders with the objective of transforming the digital divide into digital opportunities for the developing world by focusing mainly on specific and urgent needs at the local level and seeking new voluntary sources of “solidarity” finance. The DSF will complement existing mechanisms for funding the Information Society, which should continue to be fully utilized to fund the growth of new ICT infrastructure and services.

INTERNET GOVERNANCE

29.                 We reaffirm the principles enunciated in the Geneva phase of the WSIS, in December 2003, that the Internet has evolved into a global facility available to the public and its governance should constitute a core issue of the Information Society agenda. The international management of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations. It should ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning of the Internet, taking into account multilingualism.

30.                 We acknowledge that the Internet, a central element of the infrastructure of the Information Society, has evolved from a research and academic facility into a global facility available to the public.

31.                 We recognize that Internet governance, carried out according to the Geneva principles, is an essential element for a people-centred, inclusive, development-oriented and non-discriminatory Information Society. Furthermore, we commit ourselves to the stability and security of the Internet as a global facility and to ensuring the requisite legitimacy of its governance, based on the full participation of all stakeholders, from both developed and developing countries, within their respective roles and responsibilities.

32.                 We thank the UN Secretary-General for establishing the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG). We commend the chairman, members and secretariat for their work and for their report.

33.                 We take note of the WGIG’s report that has endeavoured to develop a working definition of Internet governance. It has helped identify a number of public policy issues that are relevant to Internet governance. The report has also enhanced our understanding of the respective roles and responsibilities of governments, intergovernmental and international organizations and other forums as well as the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries.

34.                 A working definition of Internet governance is the development and application by governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet.

35.                 We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations. In this respect it is recognized that:

a)      Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States. They have rights and responsibilities for international Internet-related public policy issues.

b)      The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an important role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and economic fields.

c)      Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters, especially at community level, and should continue to play such a role.

d)      Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of Internet-related public policy issues.

e)      International organizations have also had and should continue to have an important role in the development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant policies.

36.                 We recognize the valuable contribution by the academic and technical communities within those stakeholder groups mentioned in paragraph 35 to the evolution, functioning and development of the Internet.

37.                 We seek to improve the coordination of the activities of international and intergovernmental organizations and other institutions concerned with Internet governance and the exchange of information among themselves. A multi-stakeholder approach should be adopted, as far as possible, at all levels.

38.                 We call for the reinforcement of specialized regional Internet resource management institutions to guarantee the national interest and rights of countries in that particular region to manage their own Internet resources, while maintaining global coordination in this area.

39.                 We seek to build confidence and security in the use of ICTs by strengthening the trust framework. We reaffirm the necessity to further promote, develop and implement in cooperation with all stakeholders a global culture of cybersecurity, as outlined in UNGA Resolution 57/239 and other relevant regional frameworks. This culture requires national action and increased international cooperation to strengthen security while enhancing the protection of personal information, privacy and data. Continued development of the culture of cybersecurity should enhance access and trade and must take into account the level of social and economic development of each country and respect the development-oriented aspects of the Information Society.

40.                 We underline the importance of the prosecution of cybercrime, including cybercrime committed in one jurisdiction, but having effects in another. We further underline the necessity of effective and efficient tools and actions, at national and international levels, to promote international cooperation among, inter alia, law-enforcement agencies on cybercrime. We call upon governments in cooperation with other stakeholders to develop necessary legislation for the investigation and prosecution of cybercrime, noting existing frameworks, for example, UNGA Resolutions 55/63 and 56/121 on “Combating the criminal misuse of information technologies” and regional initiatives including, but not limited to, the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime.

41.                 We resolve to deal effectively with the significant and growing problem posed by spam. We take note of current multilateral, multi-stakeholder frameworks for regional and international cooperation on spam, for example, the APEC Anti-Spam Strategy, the London Action Plan, the Seoul-Melbourne Anti–Spam Memorandum of Understanding and the relevant activities of OECD and ITU. We call upon all stakeholders to adopt a multi-pronged approach to counter spam that includes, inter alia, consumer and business education; appropriate legislation, law-enforcement authorities and tools; the continued development of technical and self-regulatory measures; best practices; and international cooperation.

42.                 We reaffirm our commitment to the freedom to seek, receive, impart and use information, in particular, for the creation, accumulation and dissemination of knowledge. We affirm that measures undertaken to ensure Internet stability and security, to fight cybercrime and to counter spam, must protect and respect the provisions for privacy and freedom of expression as contained in the relevant parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Declaration of Principles.

43.                 We reiterate our commitments to the positive uses of the Internet and other ICTs and to take appropriate actions and preventive measures, as determined by law, against abusive uses of ICTs as mentioned under the Ethical Dimensions of the Information Society of the Geneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action.

44.                 We also underline the importance of countering terrorism in all its forms and manifestations on the Internet, while respecting human rights and in compliance with other obligations under international law, as outlined in UNGA A/60/L.1 with reference to Article 85 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome.

45.                 We underline the importance of the security, continuity and stability of the Internet, and the need to protect the Internet and other ICT networks from threats and vulnerabilities. We affirm the need for a common understanding of the issues of Internet security, and for further cooperation to facilitate outreach, the collection and dissemination of security-related information and exchange of good practice among all stakeholders on measures to combat security threats, at national and international levels.

46.                 We call upon all stakeholders to ensure respect for privacy and the protection of personal information and data, whether via adoption of legislation, the implementation of collaborative frameworks, best practices and self-regulatory and technological measures by business and users. We encourage all stakeholders, in particular governments, to reaffirm the right of individuals to access information according to the Geneva Declaration of Principles and other mutually agreed relevant international instruments, and to coordinate internationally as appropriate.

47.                 We recognize the increasing volume and value of all e-business, both within and across national boundaries. We call for the development of national consumer-protection laws and practices, and enforcement mechanisms where necessary, to protect the right of consumers who purchase goods and services online, and for enhanced international cooperation to facilitate a further expansion, in a non-discriminatory way, under applicable national laws, of e-business as well as consumer confidence in it.

48.                 We note with satisfaction the increasing use of ICT by governments to serve citizens and encourage countries that have not yet done so to develop national programmes and strategies for e-government.

49.                 We reaffirm our commitment to turning the digital divide into digital opportunity, and we commit to ensuring harmonious and equitable development for all. We commit to foster and provide guidance on development areas in the broader Internet governance arrangements, and to include, amongst other issues, international interconnection costs, capacity building and technology/know-how transfer. We encourage the realization of multilingualism in the Internet development environment, and we support the development of software that renders itself easily to localization, and enables users to choose appropriate solutions from different software models including open-source, free and proprietary software.

50.                 We acknowledge that there are concerns, particularly amongst developing countries, that the charges for international Internet connectivity should be better balanced to enhance access. We therefore call for the development of strategies for increasing affordable global connectivity, thereby facilitating improved and equitable access for all, by:

a)     Promoting Internet transit and interconnection costs that are commercially negotiated in a competitive environment and that should be oriented towards objective, transparent and non-discriminatory parameters, taking into account ongoing work on this subject.

b)      Setting up regional high-speed Internet backbone networks and the creation of national, sub-regional and regional Internet Exchange Points (IXPs).

c)      Recommending donor programmes and developmental financing mechanisms to consider the need to provide funding for initiatives that advance connectivity, IXPs and local content for developing countries.

d)      Encouraging ITU to continue the study of the question of International Internet Connectivity (IIC) as a matter of urgency, and to periodically provide output for consideration and possible implementation. We also encourage other relevant institutions to address this issue.

e)      Promoting the development and growth of low-cost terminal equipment, such as individual and collective user devices, especially for use in developing countries.

f)       Encouraging Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other parties in the commercial negotiations to adopt practices towards attainment of fair and balanced interconnectivity costs.

g)     Encouraging relevant parties to commercially negotiate reduced interconnection costs for Least Developed Countries (LDCs), taking into account the special constraints of LDCs.

51.                 We encourage governments and other stakeholders, through partnerships where appropriate, to promote ICT education and training in developing countries, by establishing national strategies for ICT integration in education and workforce development and dedicating appropriate resources. Furthermore, international cooperation would be extended, on a voluntary basis, for capacity building in areas relevant to Internet governance. This may include, in particular, building centres of expertise and other institutions to facilitate know-how transfer and exchange of best practices, in order to enhance the participation of developing countries and all stakeholders in Internet governance mechanisms.

52.                 In order to ensure effective participation in global Internet governance, we urge international organizations, including intergovernmental organizations, where relevant, to ensure that all stakeholders, particularly from developing countries, have the opportunity to participate in policy decision-making relating to Internet governance, and to promote and facilitate such participation.

53.                 We commit to working earnestly towards multilingualization of the Internet, as part of a multilateral, transparent and democratic process, involving governments and all stakeholders, in their respective roles. In this context, we also support local content development, translation and adaptation, digital archives, and diverse forms of digital and traditional media, and recognize that these activities can also strengthen local and indigenous communities. We would therefore underline the need to:

a)      Advance the process for the introduction of multilingualism in a number of areas including domain names, e-mail addresses and keyword look-up.

b)      Implement programmes that allow for the presence of multilingual domain names and content on the Internet and the use of various software models in order to fight against the linguistic digital divide and to ensure the participation of all in the emerging new society.

c)      Strengthen cooperation between relevant bodies for the further development of technical standards and to foster their global deployment.

54.                 We recognize that an enabling environment, at national and international levels, supportive of foreign direct investment, transfer of technology, and international cooperation, particularly in the areas of finance, debt and trade, is essential for the development of the Information Society, including for the development and diffusion of the Internet and its optimal use. In particular, the roles of the private sector and civil society as the drivers of innovation and private investment in the development of the Internet are critical. Value is added at the edges of the network in both developed and developing countries when the international and domestic policy environment encourages investment and innovation.

55.                 We recognize that the existing arrangements for Internet governance have worked effectively to make the Internet the highly robust, dynamic and geographically diverse medium that it is today, with the private sector taking the lead in day-to-day operations, and with innovation and value creation at the edges.

56.                 The Internet remains a highly dynamic medium and therefore any framework and mechanisms designed to deal with Internet governance should be inclusive and responsive to the exponential growth and fast evolution of the Internet as a common platform for the development of multiple applications.

57.                 The security and stability of the Internet must be maintained.

58.                 We recognize that Internet governance includes more than Internet naming and addressing. It also includes other significant public policy issues such as, inter alia, critical Internet resources, the security and safety of the Internet, and developmental aspects and issues pertaining to the use of the Internet.

59.                 We recognize that Internet governance includes social, economic and technical issues including affordability, reliability and quality of service.

60.                 We further recognize that there are many cross-cutting international public policy issues that require attention and are not adequately addressed by the current mechanisms.

61.                 We are convinced that there is a need to initiate, and reinforce, as appropriate, a transparent, democratic, and multilateral process, with the participation of governments, private sector, civil society and international organizations, in their respective roles. This process could envisage creation of a suitable framework or mechanisms, where justified, thus spurring the ongoing and active evolution of the current arrangements in order to synergize the efforts in this regard.

62.                 We emphasize that any Internet governance approach should be inclusive and responsive and should continue to promote an enabling environment for innovation, competition and investment.

63.                 Countries should not be involved in decisions regarding another country’s country-code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD). Their legitimate interests, as expressed and defined by each country, in diverse ways, regarding decisions affecting their ccTLDs, need to be respected, upheld and addressed via a flexible and improved framework and mechanisms.

64.                 We recognize the need for further development of, and strengthened cooperation among, stakeholders for public policies for generic Top-Level Domain names (gTLDs).

65.                 We underline the need to maximize the participation of developing countries in decisions regarding Internet governance, which should reflect their interests, as well as in development and capacity building.

66.                 In view of the continuing internationalization of the Internet and the principle of universality, we agree to implement the Geneva Principles regarding Internet governance.

67.                 We agree, inter alia, to invite the UN Secretary-General to convene a new forum for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue.

68.                 We recognize that all governments should have an equal role and responsibility for international Internet governance and for ensuring the stability, security and continuity of the Internet. We also recognize the need for development of public policy by governments in consultation with all stakeholders.

69.                 We further recognize the need for enhanced cooperation in the future, to enable governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities, in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, but not in the day-to-day technical and operational matters, that do not impact on international public policy issues.

70.                 Using relevant international organizations, such cooperation should include the development of globally-applicable principles on public policy issues associated with the coordination and management of critical Internet resources. In this regard, we call upon the organizations responsible for essential tasks associated with the Internet to contribute to creating an environment that facilitates this development of public policy principles.

71.                 The process towards enhanced cooperation, to be started by the UN Secretary-General, involving all relevant organizations by the end of the first quarter of 2006, will involve all stakeholders in their respective roles, will proceed as quickly as possible consistent with legal process, and will be responsive to innovation. Relevant organizations should commence a process towards enhanced cooperation involving all stakeholders, proceeding as quickly as possible and responsive to innovation. The same relevant organizations shall be requested to provide annual performance reports.

72.                 We ask the UN Secretary-General, in an open and inclusive process, to convene, by the second quarter of 2006, a meeting of the new forum for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue—called the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). The mandate of the Forum is to:

a)     Discuss public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet.

b)      Facilitate discourse between bodies dealing with different cross-cutting international public policies regarding the Internet and discuss issues that do not fall within the scope of any existing body.

c)      Interface with appropriate intergovernmental organizations and other institutions on matters under their purview.

d)      Facilitate the exchange of information and best practices, and in this regard make full use of the expertise of the academic, scientific and technical communities.

e)      Advise all stakeholders in proposing ways and means to accelerate the availability and affordability of the Internet in the developing world.

f)       Strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in existing and/or future Internet governance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries.

g)     Identify emerging issues, bring them to the attention of the relevant bodies and the general public, and, where appropriate, make recommendations.

h)      Contribute to capacity building for Internet governance in developing countries, drawing fully on local sources of knowledge and expertise.

i)        Promote and assess, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet governance processes.

j)        Discuss, inter alia, issues relating to critical Internet resources.

k)     Help to find solutions to the issues arising from the use and misuse of the Internet, of particular concern to everyday users.

l)        Publish its proceedings.

73.                 The Internet Governance Forum, in its working and function, will be multilateral, multi-stakeholder, democratic and transparent. To that end, the proposed IGF could:

a)      Build on the existing structures of Internet governance, with special emphasis on the complementarity between all stakeholders involved in this process – governments, business entities, civil society and intergovernmental organizations.

b)      Have a lightweight and decentralized structure that would be subject to periodic review.

c)      Meet periodically, as required. IGF meetings, in principle, may be held in parallel with major relevant UN conferences, inter alia, to use logistical support.

74.                 We encourage the UN Secretary-General to examine a range of options for the convening of the Forum, taking into consideration the proven competencies of all stakeholders in Internet governance and the need to ensure their full involvement.

75.                 The UN Secretary-General would report to UN Member States periodically on the operation of the Forum.

76.                 We ask the UN Secretary-General to examine the desirability of the continuation of the Forum, in formal consultation with Forum participants, within five years of its creation, and to make recommendations to the UN Membership in this regard.

77.                 The IGF would have no oversight function and would not replace existing arrangements, mechanisms, institutions or organizations, but would involve them and take advantage of their expertise. It would be constituted as a neutral, non-duplicative and non-binding process. It would have no involvement in day-to-day or technical operations of the Internet.

78.                 The UN Secretary-General should extend invitations to all stakeholders and relevant parties to participate at the inaugural meeting of the IGF, taking into consideration balanced geographical representation. The UN Secretary-General should also:

a)     draw upon any appropriate resources from all interested stakeholders, including the proven expertise of ITU, as demonstrated during the WSIS process; and

b)     establish an effective and cost-efficient bureau to support the IGF, ensuring multi-stakeholder participation.

79.                 Diverse matters relating to Internet governance would continue to be addressed in other relevant fora.

80.                 We encourage the development of multi-stakeholder processes at the national, regional and international levels to discuss and collaborate on the expansion and diffusion of the Internet as a means to support development efforts to achieve internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.

81.                 We reaffirm our commitment to the full implementation of the Geneva Principles.

82.                 We welcome the generous offer of the Government of Greece to host the first meeting of the IGF in Athens no later than 2006 and we call upon the UN Secretary-General to extend invitations to all stakeholders and relevant parties to participate at the inaugural meeting of the IGF.

 

Implementation and Follow-up

83.                 Building an inclusive development-oriented Information Society will require unremitting multi-stakeholder effort. We thus commit ourselves to remain fully engaged—nationally, regionally and internationally—to ensure sustainable implementation and follow-up of the outcomes and commitments reached during the WSIS process and its Geneva and Tunis phases of the Summit. Taking into account the multifaceted nature of building the Information Society, effective cooperation among governments, private sector, civil society and the United Nations and other international organizations, according to their different roles and responsibilities and leveraging on their expertise, is essential.

84.                 Governments and other stakeholders should identify those areas where further effort and resources are required, and jointly identify, and where appropriate develop, implementation strategies, mechanisms and processes for WSIS outcomes at international, regional, national and local levels, paying particular attention to people and groups that are still marginalized in their access to, and utilization of, ICTs.

85.                 Taking into consideration the leading role of governments in partnership with other stakeholders in implementing the WSIS outcomes, including the Geneva Plan of Action, at the national level, we encourage those governments that have not yet done so to elaborate, as appropriate, comprehensive, forward-looking and sustainable national e-strategies, including ICT strategies and sectoral e-strategies as appropriate[4], as an integral part of national development plans and poverty reduction strategies, as soon as possible and before 2010.

86.                 We support regional and international integration efforts aimed at building a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society, and we reiterate that strong cooperation within and among regions is indispensable to support knowledge-sharing. Regional cooperation should contribute to national capacity building and to the development of regional implementation strategies.

87.                 We affirm that the exchange of views and sharing of effective practices and resources is essential to implementing the outcomes of WSIS at the regional and international levels. To this end, efforts should be made to provide and share, among all stakeholders, knowledge and know-how, related to the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of e-strategies and policies, as appropriate. We recognize as fundamental elements to bridge the digital divide in developing countries, in a sustainable way, poverty reduction, enhanced national capacity building and the promotion of national technological development.

88.                 We reaffirm that through the international cooperation of governments and the partnership of all stakeholders, it will be possible to succeed in our challenge of harnessing the potential of ICTs as a tool, at the service of development, to promote the use of information and knowledge to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, as well as to address the national and local development priorities, thereby further improving the socio- economic development of all human beings.

89.                 We are determined to improve international, regional and national connectivity and affordable access to ICTs and information through an enhanced international cooperation of all stakeholders that promotes technology exchange and technology transfer, human resource development and training, thus increasing the capacity of developing countries to innovate and to participate fully in, and contribute to, the Information Society.

90.                 We reaffirm our commitment to providing equitable access to information and knowledge for all, recognizing the role of ICTs for economic growth and development. We are committed to working towards achieving the indicative targets, set out in the Geneva Plan of Action, that serve as global references for improving connectivity and universal, ubiquitous, equitable, non-discriminatory and affordable access to, and use of, ICTs, considering different national circumstances, to be achieved by 2015, and to using ICTs, as a tool to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, by:

a)   mainstreaming and aligning national e-strategies, across local, national, and regional action plans, as appropriate and in accordance with local and national development priorities, with in-built time-bound measures.

b)   developing and implementing enabling policies that reflect national realities and that promote a supportive international environment, foreign direct investment as well as the mobilization of domestic resources, in order to promote and foster entrepreneurship, particularly Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), taking into account the relevant market and cultural contexts. These policies should be reflected in a transparent, equitable regulatory framework to create a competitive environment to support these goals and strengthen economic growth.

c)   building ICT capacity for all and confidence in the use of ICTs by all - including youth, older persons, women, indigenous peoples, people with disabilities, and remote and rural communities - through the improvement and delivery of relevant education and training programmes and systems including lifelong and distance learning.

d)   implementing effective training and education, particularly in ICT science and technology, that motivates and promotes participation and active involvement of girls and women in the decision-making process of building the Information Society.

e)   paying special attention to the formulation of universal design concepts and the use of assistive technologies that promote access for all persons, including those with disabilities.

f)     promoting public policies aimed at providing affordable access at all levels, including community-level, to hardware as well as software and connectivity through an increasingly converging technological environment, capacity building and local content.

g)   improving access to the world's health knowledge and telemedicine services, in particular in areas such as global cooperation in emergency response, access to and networking among health professionals to help improve quality of life and environmental conditions.

h)   building ICT capacities to improve access and use of postal networks and services.

i)     using ICTs to improve access to agricultural knowledge, combat poverty, and support production of and access to locally relevant agriculture-related content.

j)     developing and implementing e-government applications based on open standards in order to enhance the growth and interoperability of e-government systems, at all levels, thereby furthering access to government information and services, and contributing to building ICT networks and developing services that are available anywhere and anytime, to anyone and on any device.

k)     supporting educational, scientific, and cultural institutions, including libraries, archives and museums, in their role of developing, providing equitable, open and affordable access to, and preserving diverse and varied content, including in digital form, to support informal and formal education, research and innovation; and in particular supporting libraries in their public-service role of providing free and equitable access to information and of improving ICT literacy and community connectivity, particularly in underserved communities.

l)     enhancing the capacity of communities in all regions to develop content in local and/or indigenous languages.

m)strengthening the creation of quality e-content, on national, regional and international levels.

n)   promoting the use of traditional and new media in order to foster universal access to information, culture and knowledge for all people, especially vulnerable populations and populations in developing countries and using, inter alia, radio and television as educational and learning tools.

o)   reaffirming the independence, pluralism and diversity of media, and freedom of information including through, as appropriate, the development of domestic legislation, we reiterate our call for the responsible use and treatment of information by the media in accordance with the highest ethical and professional standards. We reaffirm the necessity of reducing international imbalances affecting the media, particularly as regards infrastructure, technical resources and the development of human skills. These reaffirmations are made with reference to Geneva Declaration of Principles paragraphs 55 to 59.

p)   strongly encouraging ICT enterprises and entrepreneurs to develop and use environment-friendly production processes in order to minimize the negative impacts of the use and manufacture of ICTs and disposal of ICT waste on people and the environment. In this context, it is important to give particular attention to the specific needs of the developing countries.

q)   incorporating regulatory, self-regulatory, and other effective policies and frameworks to protect children and young people from abuse and exploitation through ICTs into national plans of action and e-strategies.

r)    promoting the development of advanced research networks, at national, regional and international levels, in order to improve collaboration in science, technology and higher education.

s)    promoting voluntary service, at the community level, to help maximize the developmental impact of ICTs. 

t)     promoting the use of ICTs to enhance flexible ways of working, including teleworking, leading to greater productivity and job creation.

91.                 We recognize the intrinsic relationship between disaster reduction, sustainable development and the eradication of poverty and that disasters seriously undermine investment in a very short time and remain a major impediment to sustainable development and poverty eradication. We are clear as to the important enabling role of ICTs at the national, regional and international levels including:

a)         Promoting technical cooperation and enhancing the capacity of countries, particularly developing countries, in utilizing ICT tools for disaster early-warning, management and emergency communications, including dissemination of understandable warnings to those at risk.

b)        Promoting regional and international cooperation for easy access to and sharing of information for disaster management, and exploring modalities for the easier participation of developing countries.  

c)         Working expeditiously towards the establishment of standards-based monitoring and worldwide early-warning systems linked to national and regional networks and facilitating emergency disaster response all over the world, particularly in high-risk regions.

92.                 We encourage countries, and all other interested parties, to make available child helplines, taking into account the need for mobilization of appropriate resources. For this purpose, easy-to-remember numbers, accessible from all phones and free of charge, should be made available.

93.                 We seek to digitize our historical data and cultural heritage for the benefit of future generations. We encourage effective information management policies in the public and private sectors, including the use of standards-based digital archiving and innovative solutions to overcome technological obsolescence, as a means to ensure the long-term preservation of, and continued access to, information.

94.                 We acknowledge that everyone should benefit from the potential that the Information Society offers. Therefore, we invite governments to assist, on a voluntary basis, those countries affected by any unilateral measure not in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations that impedes the full achievement of economic and social development by the population of the affected countries, and that hinders the well-being of their population.

95.                 We call upon international and intergovernmental organizations to develop, within approved resources, their policy analysis and capacity-building programmes, based on practical and replicable experiences of ICT matters, policies and actions that have led to economic growth and poverty alleviation, including through the improved competitiveness of enterprises.

96.                 We recall the importance of creating a trustworthy, transparent and non-discriminatory legal, regulatory and policy environment. To that end, we reiterate that ITU and other regional organizations should take steps to ensure rational, efficient and economic use of, and equitable access to, the radio-frequency spectrum by all countries, based on relevant international agreements.

97.                 We acknowledge that multi-stakeholder participation is essential to the successful building of a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society and that governments could play an important role in this process. We underline that the participation of all stakeholders in implementing WSIS outcomes, and following them up on national, regional and international levels with the overarching goal of helping countries to achieve internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, is key to that success.

98.                 We encourage strengthened and continuing cooperation between and among stakeholders to ensure effective implementation of the Geneva and Tunis outcomes, for instance through the promotion of national, regional and international multi-stakeholder partnerships including Public Private Partnerships (PPPs), and the promotion of national and regional multi-stakeholder thematic platforms, in a joint effort and dialogue with developing and less developed countries, development partners and actors in the ICT sector. In that respect, we welcome partnerships such as the ITU-led “Connect the World” initiative.

99.                 We agree to ensure the sustainability of progress towards the goals of WSIS after the completion of its Tunis phase and we decide, therefore, to establish a mechanism for implementation and follow-up at national, regional and international levels.

100.               At the national level, based on the WSIS outcomes, we encourage governments, with the participation of all stakeholders and bearing in mind the importance of an enabling environment, to set up a national implementation mechanism, in which:

a)     National e-strategies, where appropriate, should be an integral part of national development plans, including Poverty Reduction Strategies, aiming to contribute to the achievement of internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.

b)     ICTs should be fully mainstreamed into strategies for Official Development Assistance (ODA) through more effective information-sharing and coordination among development partners, and through analysis and sharing of best practices and lessons learned from experience with ICT for development programmes.

c)     Existing bilateral and multilateral technical assistance programmes, including those under the UN Development Assistance Framework, should be used whenever appropriate to assist governments in their implementation efforts at the national level.

d)     Common Country Assessment reports should contain a component on ICT for development.

101.               At the regional level:

a)     Upon request from governments, regional intergovernmental organizations in collaboration with other stakeholders should carry out WSIS implementation activities, exchanging information and best practices at the regional level, as well as facilitating policy debate on the use of ICT for development, with a focus on attaining the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.

b)     UN Regional Commissions, based on request of Member States and within approved budgetary resources, may organize regional WSIS follow-up activities in collaboration with regional and sub-regional organizations, with appropriate frequency, as well as assisting Member States with technical and relevant information for the development of regional strategies and the implementation of the outcomes of regional conferences.

c)     We consider a multi-stakeholder approach and the participation in regional WSIS implementation activities by the private sector, civil society, and the United Nations and other international organizations to be essential.

102.               At the international level, bearing in mind the importance of the enabling environment:

a)               Implementation and follow-up of the outcomes of the Geneva and Tunis phases of the Summit should take into account the main themes and action lines in the Summit documents.

b)              Each UN agency should act according to its mandate and competencies, and pursuant to decisions of their respective governing bodies, and within existing approved resources.

c)               Implementation and follow-up should include intergovernmental and multi-stakeholder components.

103.               We invite UN agencies and other intergovernmental organizations, in line with UNGA Resolution 57/270 B, to facilitate activities among different stakeholders, including civil society and the business sector, to help national governments in their implementation efforts. We request the UN Secretary-General, in consultation with members of the UN system Chief Executives Board for coordination (CEB), to establish, within the CEB, a UN Group on the Information Society consisting of the relevant UN bodies and organizations, with the mandate to facilitate the implementation of WSIS outcomes, and to suggest to CEB that, in considering lead agency(ies) of this Group, it takes into consideration the experience of, and activities in the WSIS process undertaken by, ITU, UNESCO and UNDP.

104.               We further request the UN Secretary-General to report to the UNGA through ECOSOC by June 2006, on the modalities of the inter-agency coordination of the implementation of WSIS outcomes including recommendations on the follow-up process.

105.               We request that ECOSOC oversees the system-wide follow-up of the Geneva and Tunis outcomes of WSIS. To this end, we request that ECOSOC, at its substantive session of 2006, reviews the mandate, agenda and composition of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD), including considering the strengthening of the Commission, taking into account the multi-stakeholder approach.

106.               WSIS implementation and follow-up should be an integral part of the UN integrated follow-up to major UN conferences and should contribute to the achievement of internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals. It should not require the creation of any new operational bodies.

107.               International and regional organizations should assess and report regularly on universal accessibility of nations to ICTs, with the aim of creating equitable opportunities for the growth of ICT sectors of developing countries.

108.               We attach great importance to multi-stakeholder implementation at the international level, which should be organized taking into account the themes and action lines in the Geneva Plan of Action, and moderated or facilitated by UN agencies when appropriate. An Annex to this document offers an indicative and non-exhaustive list of facilitators/moderators for the action lines of the Geneva Plan of Action.

109.               The experience of, and the activities undertaken by, UN agencies in the WSIS process—notably ITU, UNESCO and UNDP—should continue to be used to their fullest extent. These three agencies should play leading facilitating roles in the implementation of the Geneva Plan of Action and organize a meeting of moderators/facilitators of action lines, as mentioned in the Annex.

110.               The coordination of multi-stakeholder implementation activities would help to avoid duplication of activities. This should include, inter alia, information exchange, creation of knowledge, sharing of best practices, and assistance in developing multi-stakeholder and public-private partnerships.

111.                We request the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to make an overall review of the implementation of WSIS outcomes in 2015.

112.               We call for periodic evaluation, using an agreed methodology, such as described in
paragraphs 113-120.

113.               Appropriate indicators and benchmarking, including community connectivity indicators, should clarify the magnitude of the digital divide, in both its domestic and international dimensions, and keep it under regular assessment, and track global progress in the use of ICTs to achieve internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.

114.               The development of ICT indicators is important for measuring the digital divide. We note the launch, in June 2004, of the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development, and its efforts:

a)                    to develop a common set of core ICT indicators; to increase the availability of internationally comparable ICT statistics as well as to establish a mutually agreed framework for their elaboration, for further consideration and decision by the UN Statistical Commission.

b)                   to promote capacity building in developing countries for monitoring the Information Society.

c)                    to assess the current and potential impact of ICTs on development and poverty reduction.

d)                   to develop specific gender-disaggregated indicators to measure the digital divide in its various dimensions.

115.               We also note the launch of the ICT Opportunity Index and the Digital Opportunity Index, which will build upon the common set of core ICT indicators as they were defined within the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development.

116.               We stress that all indices and indicators must take into account different levels of development and national circumstances.

117.               The further development of these indicators should be undertaken in a collaborative, cost-effective and non-duplicative fashion.

118.               We invite the international community to strengthen the statistical capacity of developing countries by giving appropriate support at national and regional levels.

119.               We commit ourselves to review and follow up progress in bridging the digital divide, taking into account the different levels of development among nations, so as to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, assessing the effectiveness of investment and international cooperation efforts in building the Information Society, identifying gaps as well as deficits in investment and devising strategies to address them.

120.               The sharing of information related to the implementation of WSIS outcomes is an important element of evaluation. We note with appreciation the Report on the Stocktaking of WSIS-related activities, which will serve as one of the valuable tools for assisting with the follow-up, beyond the conclusion of the Tunis phase of the Summit, as well as the “Golden Book” of initiatives launched during the Tunis phase. We encourage all WSIS stakeholders to continue to contribute information on their activities to the public WSIS stocktaking database maintained by ITU. In this regard, we invite all countries to gather information at the national level with the involvement of all stakeholders, to contribute to the stocktaking.

121.               There is a need to build more awareness of the Internet in order to make it a global facility which is truly available to the public. We call upon the UNGA to declare 17 May as World Information Society Day to help to raise awareness, on an annual basis, of the importance of this global facility, on the issues dealt with in the Summit, especially the possibilities that the use of ICT can bring for societies and economies, as well as of ways to bridge the digital divide.

122.               We request the Secretary-General of the Summit to report to the General Assembly of the United Nations on its outcome, as requested in UNGA Resolution 59/220.

Annex

 

Action Line	Possible moderators/facilitators
С1. The role of public governance authorities and all stakeholders in the promotion of ICTs for development	ECOSOC/UN Regional Commissions/ITU
С2. Information and communication infrastructure	ITU
C3. Access to information and knowledge	ITU/UNESCO
C4. Capacity building	UNDP/UNESCO/ITU/ UNCTAD
C5. Building confidence and security in the use of ICTs	ITU
C6. Enabling environment	ITU/UNDP/UN Regional Commissions S/UNCTAD
C7. ICT Applications ·       E-government ·       E-business ·       E-learning ·       E-health ·       E-employment ·       E-environment   ·       E-agriculture ·       E-science	UNDP/ITU WTO/UNCTAD/ITU/UPU UNESCO/ITU/UNIDO WHO/ITU ILO/ITU WHO/WMO/UNEP/UN-Habitat/ITU/ICAO FAO/ITU UNESCO/ITU/UNCTAD
C8. Cultural diversity and identity, linguistic diversity and local content	UNESCO
C9. Media	UNESCO
C10. Ethical dimensions of the Information Society	UNESCO/ECOSOC
C11. International and regional cooperation	UN Regional Commissions / UNDP/ITU/UNESCO/ECOSOC

 

____________

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilag 4:

SECOND PHASE OF WSIS, 16-18 NOVEMBER, TUNIS

STATEMENT BY H. E. MR. KOFI ANNAN

THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS

 

Tunis, 16 November 2005

 

AS DELIVERED

 

President Ben Ali,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

 

                      I commend our hosts – President Ben Ali and the Government and people of Tunisia -- for all they have done to make this gathering possible.   Let us remember that it was the Government of Tunisia, back in 1998, that first proposed the idea of a summit on the information society.

 

                      I also thank the International Telecommunication Union and other members of the UN family for their unremitting efforts to ensure that this process produces concrete results.

 

                      Two years ago in Geneva, the first phase of the World Summit articulated a vision of an open and inclusive information society.  Our task here in Tunis is to move from diagnosis to deeds.

 

Last night you spelt out this task in the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society.

 

                      This Summit must be a summit of solutions.  It must push forward the outcome of the World Summit held two months ago at the United Nations in New York.  It must lead to information and communications technologies being used in new ways, which will bring new benefits to all social classes.  Most of all, it must generate new momentum towards developing the economies and societies of poor countries, and transforming the lives of poor people.

 

                      What do we mean by an “information society”?  We mean one in which human capacity is expanded, built up, nourished and liberated, by giving people access to the tools and technologies they need, with the education and training to use them effectively.  The hurdle here is more political than financial.  The costs of connectivity, computers and mobile telephones can be brought down.  These assets -- these bridges to a better life -- can be made universally affordable and accessible.  We must summon the will to do it.

 

                      The information society also depends on networks.  The Internet is the result of, and indeed functions as, a unique and grand collaboration.  If its benefits are to spread around the world, we must promote the same cooperative spirit among governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations.

 

                      And of course, the information society’s very life blood is freedom.  It is freedom that enables citizens everywhere to benefit from knowledge, journalists to do their essential work, and citizens to hold government accountable.  Without openness, without the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers, the information revolution will stall, and the information society we hope to build will be stillborn.

 

                      The time has come to move beyond broad discussions of the digital divide.  By now, we know what the problems are.  We must now get down to the specifics of implementation, and set out ways to foster and expand digital opportunities.

 

Those opportunities are immense.  Already, in Africa and other developing regions, the rapid spread of mobile telephones and wireless telecommunication has spurred entrepreneurship, and helped small businesses take root, particularly those run and owned by women.  Doctors in remote areas have gained access to medical information on tropical diseases.  Students have been able to tap into world-wide databases of books and research.  Early warning of natural disasters has improved, and relief workers have been able to provide quicker, better coordinated relief.  The same opportunities – and other, new ones – can be given to many more people in the developing world.

 

The UN system is ready to help member states and all stakeholders to implement whatever decisions are taken at this Summit, including on Internet governance.  But let me be absolutely clear: The United Nations does not want to “take over”, police or otherwise control the Internet.  The United Nations consists of you, its Member States.  It can want only what you agree on.  And as I understand it, what we are all striving for is to protect and strengthen the Internet, and to ensure that its benefits are available to all.

 

The United States deserves our thanks for having developed the Internet and making it available to the world.  It has exercised its oversight responsibilities fairly and honourably.  I believe all of you agree that day-to-day management of the Internet must be left to technical institutions, not least to shield it from the heat of day-to-day politics.  But I think you also all acknowledge the need for more international participation in discussions of Internet governance issues.  The question is how to achieve this.  So let those discussions continue.

 

This is envisaged in the agreements you reached last night and we in the United Nations will support this process in every way we can.

 

Mr. President,

 

The experiences of recent years – in this Summit process, the ICT Task Force, the Working Group on Internet Governance, the Digital Solidarity Fund, UNFIP -- the UN Office for International Partnerships, the Global Compact corporate citizenship initiative and other efforts -- have given us new insights into what it takes to build effective partnerships and platforms.  UN agencies and departments continue to work hard to build capacity, and to use information technologies to boost our efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

 

These efforts are bearing fruit.  But for far too many people, the gains remain out of reach.  There is a tremendous yearning, not for technology per se, but for what technology can make possible.  I urge you to respond to that thirst, and to take the tangible steps that will enable this Summit to be remembered as an event which advanced the causes of development, of dignity and of peace.

 

Thank you very much.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilag 5:

 

SECOND PHASE OF WSIS, 16-18 NOVEMBER, TUNIS

STATEMENT FROM United Kingdom

The Right Honourable Alun MICHAEL, Minister of State for Industry and Regions

 

16 November 2005

 

 

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

·                 On behalf of the European Union and the two acceding countries, Romania and Bulgaria,       I would like to congratulate the President of the Preparatory Committee and all Member States on successfully concluding negotiations last night, on what has now become the "Tunis Agenda for the Information Society".

·                 The European Union warmly welcomes this achievement. We recognise the Tunis Agenda as an important contribution towards what needs to be a truly global effort to bridge the digital divide: to ensure that the benefits of information communication technologies (ICTs) can be enjoyed by all. We look forward to working with all stakeholders to ensure the full and effective implementation of both stages of the WSIS process so that this truly becomes, as the United Nations Secretary General exhorted us in his address this morning, a “Summit of Solutions”.

·                 In this context, the EU is the world's largest donor and is committed to doubling its aid budget by 2010. A growing proportion goes to developing country governments directly to support their own development plans and budgets, and they choose how much to allocate to ICT. Its importance is shown by the major role ICT is playing in the fight against HIV and Aids through activities like the popular South African soap opera “ Soul City”.

·                 Now I would like to make a few comments in my national capacity.

·                 In 2005, the Commission for Africa, the G8 Summit, the UN World Summit and the World Summit on the Information Society have all highlighted the important role that ICTs play in development.

·                 The economic and social benefits are far-reaching –connecting schools to the Internet; enabling remote rural communities to get urgent medical advice; giving farmers access to market price information. Mobile phones are now being used in developing countries to transfer cash virtually, bringing micro-credit and banking services to previously excluded poorer communities.

·                 ICT can enable people to participate more effectively in political processes. Thus ICT is an essential component of the participation, transparency, and good governance that are increasingly seen (for instance by the Africa Commission) as the crucial basis for development and poverty reduction.

·                 In this period of unprecedented change in the information society we, in government, must, with industry, place the right conditions to encourage wider access to ICTs and foster further innovation and social and economic development.

·                 A good example is Bangladesh, where the Administration — in an effort to quickly expand local access to communications — partially deregulated the VSAT/satellite sector, achieving an eight-fold increase in connectivity as a result.

·                 In Africa, through their Regional ICT Infrastructure Programme the African Union and NEPAD aim to complete an optic fibre link around Africa and establish connections between all African countries, and to the rest of the world. It shows what can be achieved if governments, the development community and the private sector work together. The EU will play its part under the new Infrastructure Partnership with Africa.

·                 Our experience in the UK suggests that there are three basic principles for governments to follow:

o               First, to avoid regulation that limits innovation. This is important when we deal with issues such as the future framework for audiovisual content and Voice over Internet Protocol.

o               Second, regulation should deliver market stability and certainty which will attract investment based on open and competitive markets.

o               Third governments should work in partnership with industry and consumers to find, wherever possible, non-legislative solutions to deal effectively with public policy concerns. Take the example of an issue that is important to all of us: protecting children. In my country we have developed a solution that is much speedier and more effective than legislation can ever be. Industry and Government agreed that industry itself would set up a clearing house, called the Internet Watch Foundation to detect abusive images of children on the Internet. Industry agreed to work with the Foundation to remove those sites. Government agreed to hold back from legislation. Together we have achieved more through co-operation in a year than legislation could achieve in five years, and at minimum cost.

·                 We have exciting opportunities ahead for human progress. We need continued innovation in new technologies; stable and pragmatic policies that will attract investment; and ICTs which are relevant and beneficial to all communities – let’s work together, with all stakeholders, to make this happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilag 6:

 

SECOND PHASE OF WSIS, 16-18 NOVEMBER, TUNIS

STATEMENT by Mr Uffe Toudal Pedersen, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation

DENMARK

 

November 17, 2005

 

Mr. President, Mr. Secretary-General,

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

 

Information and communication technology – ICT – is the most powerful and efficient enabler in today’s world. This is the case for all countries – rich and poor alike.

ICT is the key technology to stimulate sustainable economic growth – and to improve the quality of life for people all over the World.

ICT supports the struggles of individuals to take a stronger responsibility for our own lives – and for participating actively in forming the societies we live in.

ICT has the potential to advance human empowerment, human rights, democracy and peace.

ICT therefore has a major role to play if we want to fulfil the ambitious goals we set for ourselves with the Millennium Declaration five years ago.

The World Summit on the Information Society is of vital importance if we want to spread these positive benefits and potentials of ICT to all corners of our globalized World.

The single most important subject of this Summit concerns Internet Governance.

Denmark believes that the private sector and civil society should continue to have the lead role in the development of the Internet – to the benefit of citizens, businesses and governments alike.

We therefore have to find a way to ensure true legitimacy to the governance system without jeopardising further development of the Internet.

A governance system at the international level, which cannot introduce any form of content control! But a governance system, which can protect the core infrastructure of the Internet!

Ladies and gentlemen,

We can all do better in our mutual struggle to ensure an inclusive global Information Society.

And we all have to work harder to protect freedom of expression – the most vital corner stone of the Information Society. Countries, which do not understand this, will in the long run loose in the global competition on investment and economic growth.

Each nation must put the development of the information society high on its national agenda. Developing countries have in particular an important task in integrating their national e-strategies with national poverty reduction strategies.

But it is also important for developing countries to work much harder to fight corruption, to ensure political liberty and economic freedom, to invest in health and education of their people, and to promote the rights of women.

It is important for all countries – rich as well as poor – to work actively to reap the maximum benefits of globalisation.

The challenge is to adapt the economy to rapid changes, to be part of the new international division of labour with products of high quality and to ensure that benefits are spread out to all groups in society.

The Danish Government has for many years acknowledged that the future of the Danish society depends on the ability to create and use knowledge and technology. We aim to strengthen the emphasis on research, education, innovation and entrepreneurship.

We already know that the use of ICT by enterprises, public institutions and private households has an enormous impact.

And the area is constantly being developed for the purpose of promoting overall growth in the business sector, ensuring sustainable development, obtaining service improvements and creating efficiency gains.

However we also have our challenges.

To reap the full benefits from ICT, it is necessary to move from basic use to integration across all sectors of society. And in view of the technological development, security issues are in focus more than ever.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We are looking forward to the outcome of the processes that will follow from this Summit. Results that should lead to a prosperous and successful roll-out of the Information Society and to the benefit of all in the Global Community.

Thank you for your attention. And warm thanks to the organizers of the Summit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilag 7:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Much more

could have been achieved”

 

 

 

 

 

Civil Society Statement

 

on the

World Summit on the Information Society

 

 

 

 

18 December 2005

 

 

 

 

 

Revision 1 - 23 December 2005

 

 

 

Content

 

 

 

I. Introduction – Our Perspective After the WSIS Process Error! Bookmark not defined.

 

II. Issues Addressed During the Tunis Phase of WSIS_ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Social Justice, Financing and People-Centred Development Error! Bookmark not defined.

Human Rights Error! Bookmark not defined.

Internet Governance Error! Bookmark not defined.

Global governance Error! Bookmark not defined.

Participation Error! Bookmark not defined.

 

III. Issues Addressed in the Geneva and Tunis Phases Error! Bookmark not defined.

Gender Equality Error! Bookmark not defined.

Culture, Knowledge, and the Public Domain Error! Bookmark not defined.

Education, Research, and Practice Error! Bookmark not defined.

Media Error! Bookmark not defined.

Universal Design and Assistive Technologies Error! Bookmark not defined.

Health Information Error! Bookmark not defined.

Children and Young People in the Information Society Error! Bookmark not defined.

Ethical Dimensions Error! Bookmark not defined.

 

IV. Where to Go From Here – Our Tunis Commitment Error! Bookmark not defined.

Element One: Evolution of Our Internal Organization Error! Bookmark not defined.

Element Two: Involvement in the Internet Governance Forum_ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Element Three: Involvement in Follow-Up and Implementation Error! Bookmark not defined.

Element Four: Lessons Learned for the UN System in General Error! Bookmark not defined.

Element five: Outreach to Other Constituencies Error! Bookmark not defined.

I. Introduction – Our Perspective After the WSIS Process

 

The WSIS was an opportunity for a wide range of actors to work together to develop principles and prioritise actions that would lead to democratic, inclusive, participatory and development-oriented information societies at the local, national and international levels; societies in which the ability to access, share and communicate information and knowledge is treated as a public good and takes place in ways that strengthen the rich cultural diversity of our world.

 

Civil Society entered the Tunis Phase of WSIS with these major goals:

 

·         Agreement on financing mechanisms and models that will close the growing gaps in access to information and communication tools, capacities and infrastructure that exist between countries, and in many cases within countries and that will enable opportunities for effective ICT uses.

·         Agreement on a substantively broad and procedurally inclusive approach to Internet governance, the reform of existing governance mechanisms in accordance with the Geneva principles, and the creation of a new forum to promote multi-stakeholder dialogue, analysis, trend monitoring, and capacity building in the field of Internet governance.

·         Ensuring that our human-centred vision of the ‘Information Society’, framed by a global commitment to human rights, social justice and inclusive and sustainable development, is present throughout the implementation phase.

·         Achieving a change of tide in perceptions and practices of participatory decision-making. We saw the WSIS as a milestone from which the voluntary and transparent participation of Civil Society would become more comprehensive and integrated at local, national, regional and global levels of governance and decision making.

·         Agreement on strong commitment to the centrality of human rights, especially the right to access and impart information and to individual privacy.

 

Civil Society affirms that, facing very limited resources, it has contributed positively to the WSIS process, a contribution that could have been even greater had the opportunity been made available for an even more comprehensive participation on our part. Our contribution will continue beyond the Summit. It is a contribution that is made both through constructive engagement and through challenge and critique.

 

While we value the process and the outcomes, we are convinced much more could have been achieved. We have taken a month after the closure of the Tunis Summit to discuss the outcomes and the process of WSIS. We built on our Geneva 2003 Civil Society Summit Declaration “Shaping Information Societies for Human Needs”, and we evaluated the experiences and lessons learned in the four years of WSIS I and WSIS II. This statement was developed in a global online consultation process. It is presented as Civil Society’s official contribution to the Summit outcomes.

 

The issues of greatest concern to Civil Society are addressed in sections II and III of this statement. For most of these items, minor achievements in the outcomes from WSIS were offset by major shortcomings, with much remaining to be done. Some of our greatest concerns involve what we consider to be insufficient attention or inadequate recommendations concerning people-centred issues such as the degree of attention paid to human rights and freedom of expression, the financial mechanisms for the promotion of development that was the original impetus for the WSIS process, and support for capacity building. In section IV, we lay out the first building blocks of Civil Society’s “Tunis Commitment”. Civil Society has every intention to remain involved in the follow-up and implementation processes after the Tunis summit. We trust governments realize that our participation is vital to achieve a more inclusive and just Information Society.

 

II. Issues Addressed During the Tunis Phase of WSIS

Social Justice, Financing and People-Centred Development

The broad mandate for WSIS was to address the long-standing issues in economic and social development from the newly emerging perspectives of the opportunities and risks posed by the revolution in Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs). The summit was expected to identify and articulate new development possibilities and paradigms being made possible in the Information Society, and to evolve public policy options for enabling and realising these opportunities. Overall, it is impossible not to conclude that WSIS has failed to live up to these expectations. The Tunis phase in particular, which was presented as the “summit of solutions”, did not provide concrete achievements to meaningfully address development priorities.

 

While the summit did discuss the importance of new financing mechanisms for ICT for Development (ICTD), it failed to recognize that ICTD presents a challenge beyond that of traditional development financing. Nor did the Tunis fully comprehend that new means and sources of financing and the exploration of new models and mechanisms are required.

 

Investments in ICTD - in infrastructure, capacity building, appropriate software and hardware and in developing applications and services – underpin all other processes of development innovation, learning and sharing, and should be seen in this light. Though development resources are admittedly scarce and have to be allocated with care and discretion, ICTD financing should not be viewed as directly in competition with the financing of other developmental sectors. Financing ICTD should be considered a priority at both national and international levels, with specific approaches to each country according to its level of development and with a long-term perspective adapted to a global vision of development and sharing within the global community.

 

Financing ICTD requires social and institutional innovation, with adequate mechanisms for transparency, evaluation, and follow-up. Financial resources need to be mobilised at all levels – local, national and international, including through the realization of ODA commitments agreed to in the Monterrey Consensus and including assistance to programs and activities whose short-term sustainability cannot be immediately demonstrated because of the low level of resources available as their starting point.

 

Internet access, for everybody and everywhere, especially among disadvantaged populations and in rural areas, must be considered as a global public good. In many cases market approaches are unlikely to address the connectivity needs of particularly disadvantaged regions and populations. In many such areas, initial priority may need to be given to the provision of more traditional ICTs - radio, TV, video and telephony - while the conditions are developed for ensuring the availability of complete Internet connectivity. Info-structure and development often require attention to the development of more traditional infrastructure as well such as roads and electricity.

 

While the summit in general has failed to agree on adequate funding for ICTD, Civil Society was able to introduce significant sections in the Tunis Commitment (paragraph 35) and in the Tunis Agenda (paragraph 21) on the importance of public policy in mobilizing resources for financing. This can serve as a balance to the market-based orientation of much of the text on financing.

 

The potential of ICT as tools for development, and not merely tools for communication, by now should have been realised by all states. National ICT strategies should be closely related to national strategies for development and poverty eradication. Aid strategies in developed countries should include clear guidelines for the incorporation of ICT into all aspects of development. In this way ICTs should be integrated into general development assistance and in this way contribute to the mobilisation of additional resources and an increase in the efficiency of development assistance.

 

We welcome the launch of the Digital Solidarity Fund (DSF) in March 2005 and take note of the support it got both from the United Nations and the Tunis Summit. Nevertheless, taking into account that the DSF was established on a voluntarily basis, we are concerned that there are no clear commitments from governments and the private sector to provide the needed material support to ensure the success of this fund. We invite all partners from the governmental and the private sector to commit themselves to the so-called "Geneva Principle" where each ICT contract concluded by a public administration with a private company includes a one percent contribution to the DSF. We particularly encourage local and regional administrations to adopt this principle and welcome the relevant statement made by the World Summit of Cities and Local Authorities in Bilbao, November 2005, on the eve of WSIS II.

Human Rights

The Information Society must be based on human rights as laid out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This includes civil and political rights, as well as social, economic and cultural rights. Human rights and development are closely linked. There can be no development without human rights, no human rights without development.

 

This has been affirmed time and again, and was strongly stated in the Vienna World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. It was also affirmed in the WSIS 2003 Declaration of Principles. All legislation, policies, and actions involved in developing the global Information Society must respect, protect and promote human rights standards and the rule of law.

 

Despite the Geneva commitment to an Information Society respectful of human rights, there is still a long way to go. A number of human rights were barely addressed in the Geneva Declaration of Principles. This includes the cross-cutting principles of non-discrimination, gender equality, and workers’ rights. The right to privacy, which is the basis of autonomous personal development and thus at the root of the exertion of many other fundamental human rights, is only mentioned in the Geneva Declaration as part of "a global culture of cyber-security". In the Tunis Commitment, it has disappeared, to make room for extensive underlining of security needs, as if privacy were a threat to security, whereas the opposite is true: privacy is an essential requirement for security. The summit has also ignored our demand that the principle of the privacy and integrity of the vote be ensured if and when electronic voting technologies are used.

 

Other rights were more explicitly addressed, but are de facto violated on a daily basis. This goes for freedom of expression, freedom of information, freedom of association and assembly, the right to a fair trial, the right to education, and the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of the individual and his or her family.

 

Furthermore, as the second WSIS phase has amplified, a formal commitment is one thing, implementation is something else. Side events open to the general public were organised by civil society both at the Geneva and Tunis Summit, consistent with a long tradition in the context of UN summits. In Tunis, the initiative by parts of civil society to organize a "Citizens' Summit on the Information Society" was prevented from happening. At the Geneva Summit, the "We Seize" event was closed down and then reopened. This is a clear reminder that though governments have signed on to human rights commitments, fundamental human rights such as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly can not be taken for granted in any part of the world.

 

The summit has failed to define mechanisms and actions that would actively promote and protect human rights in the Information Society. Post-WSIS there is an urgent need to strengthen the means of human rights enforcement, to ensure the embedding of human rights proofing in national legislation and practises, to strengthen education and awareness raising in the area of rights-based development, to transform human rights standards into ICT policy recommendations, and to mainstream ICT issues into the global and regional human rights monitoring system – in summary: To move from declarations and commitments into action. Toward this end, an independent commission should be established to review national and international ICT regulations and practices and their compliance with international human rights standards. This commission should also address the potential applications of ICTs for the realization of human rights in the Information Society.

Internet Governance

Civil Society is pleased with the decision to create an Internet Governance Forum (IGF), which it has advocated for since 2003. We also are pleased that the IGF will have sufficient scope to deal with the issues we believe must be addressed, most notably the conformity of existing arrangements with the Geneva Principles, and other cross-cutting or multidimensional issues that cannot be optimally dealt with within current arrangements. However, we reiterate our concerns that the Forum must not be anchored in any existing specialized international organization, meaning that its legal form, finances, and professional staff should be independent. In addition, we reiterate our view that the forum should be more than a place for dialogue. As was recommended by the WGIG Report, it should also provide expert analysis, trend monitoring, and capacity building, including in close collaboration with external partners in the research community.

 

We are concerned about the absence of details on how this forum will be created and on how it will be funded. We insist that the modalities of the IGF be determined in full cooperation with Civil Society. We emphasize that success in the forum, as in most areas of Internet governance, will be impossible without the full participation of Civil Society. By full participation we mean much more than playing a mere advisory role. Civil Society must be able to participate fully and equally both in plenary and any working or drafting group discussions, and must have the same opportunities as other stakeholders to influence agendas and outcomes.

 

The Tunis Agenda addressed the issue of political oversight of critical Internet resources in its paragraphs 69 to 71. This, in itself, is an achievement. It is also important that governments recognized the need for the development of a set of Internet-related public policy principles that would frame political oversight of Internet resources. These principles must respect, protect and promote human rights as laid down in international human rights treaties, ensure equitable access to information and online opportunities for all, and promote development.

 

It is important that governments have established that developing these principles should be a shared responsibility. However, it is very unfortunate that the Tunis Agenda suggests that governments are only willing to share this role and responsibility among themselves, in cooperation with international organisations. Civil Society remains strongly of the view that the formulation of appropriate and legitimate public policies pertaining to Internet governance requires the full and meaningful involvement of non-governmental stakeholders.

 

With regard to paragraph 40 of the Tunis Agenda, we are disappointed that there is no mention that efforts to combat cyber-crime need to be exercised in the context of checks and balances provided by fundamental human rights, particularly freedom of expression and privacy.

 

With regard to paragraph 63, we believe that a country code Top Level Domain (ccTLD) is a public good both for people of the concerned country or economy and for global citizens who have various linkages to particular countries. While we recognize the important role of governments in protecting the ccTLDs that refer to their countries or economies, this role must be executed in a manner that respects human rights as expressed in existing international treaties through a democratic, transparent and inclusive process with full involvement of all stakeholders.

 

To ensure that development of the Internet and its governance takes place in the public interest, it is important for all stakeholders to better understand how core Internet governance functions – as for example, DNS management, IP address allocation, and others – are carried out. It is equally important that these same actors understand the linkages between broader Internet governance and Internet related matters such as cyber-crime, Intellectual Property Rights, e-commerce, e-government, human rights and capacity building and economic development. The responsibility of creating such awareness should be shared by everyone, including those at present involved in the governance and development of the Internet and emerging information and communication platforms. Equally it is essential that as this awareness develops in newer users of the Internet, older users must be open to the new perspectives that will emerge.

Global governance

A world that is increasingly more connected faces a considerable and growing number of common issues which need to be addressed by global governance institutions and processes. While Civil Society recognises that there are flaws and inefficiencies in the United Nations system that require urgent reform, we believe strongly that it remains most legitimate inter-governmental forum, where rich and poor countries have the same rights to speak, participate, and make decisions together.

 

We are concerned that during the WSIS it emerged that some governments, especially from developed countries, lack faith in, and appear to be unwilling to invest authority and resources in the present multilateral system, along with concerted efforts to further improve it. We also regret that debates on creating private-public partnerships and new para-institutions within the United Nations have over-shadowed the overall discussion on bridging the digital divide, which in turn has to be linked to a deep reform of the UN and the global economic system.

 

In our understanding, summits take place precisely to develop the principles that will underpin global public policy and governance structures; to address critical issues, and to decide on appropriate responses to these issues. Shrinking global public policy spaces raise serious questions concerning the kind of global governance toward which we are heading, and what this might mean for people who are socially, economically and politically marginalised: precisely those people who most rely on public policy to protect their interests.

Participation

In the course of four years, as a result of constant pressure from Civil Society, improvements in Civil Society participation in these processes have been achieved, including speaking rights in official plenaries and sub-committees, and ultimately rights to observe in drafting groups. The UN Working Group on Internet Governance created an innovative format where governmental and Civil Society actors worked on an equal footing and Civil Society actually carried a large part of the drafting load.

 

Due to the pressure of time and the need of governments to interact with Civil Society actors in the Internet Governance field, the resumed session of PrepCom3 was in fact the most open of all. We would like to underline that this openness, against all odds, contributed to reaching consensus.

 

WSIS has demonstrated beyond any doubt the benefits of interaction between all stakeholders. The innovative rules and practices of participation established in this process will be fully documented to provide a reference point and a benchmark for participants in UN organizations and processes in the future.

 

Civil Society thanks those governments and international bodies that greatly supported our participation in the WSIS process. We hope and expect that these achievements are taken further and strengthened, especially in more politically contested spaces of global policymaking such as those concerning intellectual property rights, trade, environment, and peace and disarmament.

 

We note that some governments from developing countries were not actively supportive of greater observer participation believing that that it can lead to undue dominance of debate and opinions by international and developed countries’ Civil Society organisations and the private sector. We believe that to change this perception, efforts should be engaged in to strengthen the presence, independence and participation of Civil Society constituencies in and from their own countries.

 

As for the period beyond the summit, the Tunis documents clearly establish that the soon-to-be created Internet Governance Forum, and the future mechanisms for implementation and follow-up (including the revision of the mandate of the ECOSOC Commission on Science and Technology for Development) must take into account the multi-stakeholder approach.

 

We want to express concern at the vagueness of text referring to the role of Civil Society. In almost every paragraph talking about multi-stakeholder participation, the phrase “in their respective roles and responsibilities” is used to limit the degree of multi-stakeholder participation. This limitation is due to the refusal of governments to recognize the full range of the roles and responsibilities of Civil Society.  Instead of the reduced capabilities assigned in paragraph 35C of the Tunis Agenda that attempt to restrict Civil Society to a community role, governments should have at minima referred to the list of Civil Society roles and responsibilities listed in the WGIG report. These are:

 

·         Awareness raising and capacity building (knowledge, training, skills sharing);

·         Promote various public interest objectives;

·         Facilitate network building;

·         Mobilize citizens in democratic processes;

·         Bring perspectives of marginalized groups including for example excluded communities and grassroots activists;

·         Engage in policy processes;

·         Bring expertise, skills, experience and knowledge in a range of ICT policy areas contributing to policy processes and policies that are more bottom-up, people-centred and inclusive;

·         Research and development of technologies and standards;

·         Development and dissemination of best practices;

·         Helping to ensure that political and market forces are accountable to the needs of all members of society;

·         Encourage social responsibility and good governance practice;

·         Advocate for development of social projects and activities that are critical but may not be ‘fashionable’ or profitable;

·         Contribute to shaping visions of human-centred information societies based on human rights, sustainable development, social justice and empowerment.

 

Civil Society has reason for concern that the limited concessions obtained in the last few days before the summit, from countries that previously refused the emergence of a truly multi-stakeholder format, will be at risk in the coming months. Civil Society actors therefore intend to remain actively mobilized. They need to proactively ensure that not only the needed future structures be established in a truly multi-stakeholder format, but also that the discussions preparing their mandates are conducted in an open, transparent and inclusive manner, allowing participation of all stakeholders on an equal footing. Civil Society hopes to be given the means to ensure all its representatives from different regions, languages and cultures, from developed and developing countries, can fully participate.

III. Issues Addressed in the Geneva and Tunis Phases

Gender Equality

Equal and active participation of women is essential, especially in decision-making. This includes all forums that will be established in relation to WSIS and the issues it has taken up. With that, there is a need for capacity building that is focussed on women’s engagement with the shaping of an Information Society at all levels, including policy making on infrastructure development, financing, and technology choice.

 

There is a need for real effort and commitment to transforming the masculinist culture embedded within existing structures and discourses of the Information Society which serves to reinforce gender disparity and inequality. Without full, material and engaged commitment to the principle of gender equality, women’s empowerment and non-discrimination, the vision of a just and equitable Information Society cannot be achieved.

 

Considering the affirmation of unequivocal support for gender equality and women’s empowerment expressed in the Geneva Declaration of Principles and paying careful attention to Paragraph 23 of the Tunis Commitment, all government signatories must ensure that national policies, programmes and strategies developed and implemented to build a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society demonstrate significant commitment to the principles of gender equality and women’s empowerment.

 

We emphasise that financial structures and mechanisms need to be geared towards addressing the gender divide, including the provision of adequate budgetary allocations. Comprehensive gender-disaggregated data and indicators have to be developed at national levels to enable and monitor this process. We urge all governments to take positive action to ensure that institutions and practices, including those of the private sector, do not result in discrimination against women. Governments that are parties to the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) are in fact bound to this course of action.

Culture, Knowledge, and the Public Domain

Each generation of humankind is depending upon its predecessors to leave them with a liveable, sustainable and stable environment. The environment we were discussing throughout the WSIS is the public domain of global knowledge. Like our planet with its natural resources, that domain is the heritage of all humankind and the reservoir from which new knowledge is created. Limited monopolies, such as copyrights and patents were originally conceived as tools to serve that public domain of global knowledge to the benefit of humankind. Whenever society grants monopolies, a delicate balance must be struck: Careless monopolization will make our heritage unavailable to most people, to the detriment of all.

 

It has become quite clear that this balance has been upset by the interests of the rights-holding industry as well as the digitalization of knowledge. Humankind now has the power to instantaneously share knowledge in real-time, without loss, and at almost no cost. Civil Society has worked hard to defend that ability for all of humankind.

 

Free Software is an integral part of this ability: Software is the cultural technique and most important regulator of the digital age. Access to it determines who may participate in a digital world. While in the Geneva phase, WSIS has recognised the importance of Free Software, it has not acted upon that declaration and this recognition faded in the Tunis phase. In the Tunis Commitment, Free Software is presented as a software model next to proprietary software, but paragraph 29 reiterates “the importance of proprietary software in the markets of the countries.” This ignores that a proprietary software market is always striving towards dependency and monopolization, both of which are detrimental to economy and development as a whole. Proprietary software is under exclusive control of and to the benefit of its proprietor. Furthermore: Proprietary software is often written in modern sweat-shops for the benefit of developed economies, which are subsidized at the expense of developing and least-developed countries in this way.

 

While WSIS has somewhat recognised the importance of free and open source software, it has not asserted the significance of this choice for development. It is silent on other issues like open content (which goes beyond open access in the area of academic publications), new open telecom paradigms and community-owned infrastructure as important development enablers.

 

The WSIS process has failed to introduce cultural and linguistic diversity as a cross-cutting issue in the Information Society. The Information Society and its core elements - knowledge, information, communication and the information and communication technologies (ICT) together with related rules and standards - are cultural concepts and expressions. Accordingly, culturally defined approaches, protocols, proceedings and obligations have to be respected and culturally appropriate applications developed and promoted. In order to foster and promote cultural diversity it must be ensured that no one has to be a mere recipient of Western knowledge and treatment. Therefore development of the cultural elements of the Information Society must involve strong participation by all cultural communities. The WSIS has failed to recognize the need for developing knowledge resources to shift the current lack of diversity, to move from the dominant paradigm of over-developed nations and cultures to the need for being open to learning and seeing differently.

 

Indigenous Peoples, further to self-determination and pursuant to their traditional and customary laws, protocols, rules and regulations, oral and written, provide for the access, use, application and dissemination of traditional and cultural knowledge, oral histories, folklore and related customs and practices. WSIS has failed to protect these from exploitation, misuse and appropriation by third parties. As a result, the traditional knowledge, oral histories, folklore and related customs, practices and representations have been and continue to be exploited by both informal and formal (being copyright, trademark and patent) means, with no benefits to the rightful Indigenous holders of that knowledge.

Education, Research, and Practice

If we want future generations to understand the real basis of our digital age, freedom has to be preserved for the knowledge of humankind: Free Software, open courseware and free educational as well as scientific resources empower people to take their life into their own hands. If not, they will become only users and consumers of information technologies, instead of active participants and well informed citizens in the Information Society. Each generation has a choice to make: Schooling of the mind and creativity, or product schooling? Most unfortunately, the WSIS has shown a significant tendency towards the latter.

 

We are happy that universities, museums, archives, libraries have been recognized by WSIS as playing an important role as public institutions and with the community of researchers and academics. Unfortunately, telecenters are missing in the WSIS documents. Community informatics, social informatics, telecenters and human resources such as computer professionals, and the training of these, have to be promoted, so that ICT serves training and not training serves ICT. Thus special attention must be paid to supporting sustainable capacity building with a specific focus on research and skills development. In order to tackle development contexts training should have a sociological focus too and not be entirely technologically framed.

 

Problems of access, regulation, diversity and efficiency require attention to power relations both in the field of ICT policy-making and in the everyday uses of ICT. Academic research should play a pivotal role in evaluating whether ICT meets and serves the individuals’ and the public's multiple needs and interests - as workers, women, migrants, racial, ethnic and sexual minorities, among others - across very uneven information societies throughout the world. Furthermore, because power relations and social orientations are often embedded in the very designs of ICT, researchers should be sensitive to the diverse and multiple needs of the public in the technological design of ICT. Similarly, educators at all levels should be empowered to develop curricula that provide or contribute to training for people not only as workers and consumers using ICT, but also in the basic science and engineering of ICT, in the participatory design of ICT by communities with computing professionals, the critical assessment of ICT, the institutional and social contexts of their development and implementation, as well as their creative uses for active citizenship. Young people - given their large numbers, particularly in developing countries, and enthusiasm and expertise in the use of ICTs - remain an untapped resource as initiators of peer-to-peer learning projects at the community and school levels. These issues have largely been ignored by WSIS.

 

The actors that need to be involved in the process of making this vision a reality are the professionals and researchers, the students and their families, the support services and human resources of the resources centres, politicians at all levels, social organizations and NGOs, but also the private sector. However, in the teaching profession, it is necessary to recognize and accept the need for learning and evolution with regards to ICT.

 

We emphasize the special role that the computing, information science, and engineering professions have in helping to shape the Information Society to meet human needs.  Their education must encourage socially-responsible practices in the design, implementation, and operation of ICT. The larger Information Society has an equally important and corresponding role to play by participating in the design of ICT. We, therefore, encourage increased cooperation between the computing, information science, and engineering professions and end-users of ICTs, particularly communities.

 

We furthermore have repeatedly underlined the unique role of ICT in socio-economic development and in promoting the fulfilment of internationally agreed development goals, including those contained in the Millennium Declaration. This is not least true in the reference to access to information and universal primary education. To secure the fulfilment of these goals, it is of key importance that the issue of ICT as tools for the improvement of education is also incorporated in the broader development strategies at both national and international levels.

Media

We are pleased that the principle of freedom of expression has been reaffirmed in the WSIS II texts and that they echo much of the language of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. While we note that the Tunis Commitment recognises the place of the media in a new Information Society, this should never have been in question.

 

In the future, representatives of the media should be assured a place in all public forums considering development of the Internet and all other relevant aspects of the Information Society. As key actors in the Information Society, the media must have a place at the table, and this must be fully recognized both by governments and by Civil Society itself.

 

While recognizing media and freedom of expression, the WSIS documents are weak on offering support for developing diversity in the media sector and for avoiding a growing concentration and uniformity of content. They specifically neglect a range of projects and initiatives which are of particular value for Civil Society and which need a favourable environment: Community media, telecenters, grassroots and Civil Society-based media. These media empower people for independent and creative participation in knowledge-building and information-sharing. They represent the prime means for large parts of the world population to participate in the Information Society and should be an integral part of the public policy implementation of the goals of the Geneva Declaration, which refers to the promotion of the diversity of media and media ownership.

 

The WSIS documents also mostly focus on market-based solutions and commercial use. Yet the Internet, satellite, cable and broadcast systems all utilize public resources, such as airwaves and orbital paths. These should be managed in the public interest as publicly owned assets through transparent and accountable regulatory frameworks to enable the equitable allocation of resources and infrastructure among a plurality of media including community media. We reaffirm our commitment that commercial use of these resources begins with a public interest obligation.

Universal Design and Assistive Technologies

We are pleased to note that WSIS has identified the fact that ICT Design is the core issue of the Digital Divide for persons with disabilities. The Tunis Agenda for the Information Society clearly states in its paragraph 90e “paying special attention to the formulation of universal design concepts and the use of assistive technologies that promote access for all persons, including those with disabilities”. Due to great efforts of all stake holders, in particular of those with disabilities, we recognize significant advancement in the common understanding on the Digital Divide of persons with disabilities and strategies to achieve the targets set out in the Geneva Plan of Action to be achieved by ICT development with the Universal Design Concept in combination with Assistive Technologies that meet specific requirements of persons with disabilities.

 

In terms of equal opportunities for the participation of persons with disabilities in WSIS the process of that was addressed in Geneva Declaration of the Global Forum on Disability in the Information Society in Geneva, we are grateful for all efforts extended by the summit organizers, who established a focal point for participants with disabilities bat the last stage. However, there is still a lot to do to ensure equal participation of persons with disabilities in the WSIS Action Plan implementation process.

 

We call upon all governments, private sectors, civil society and international organizations to make the implementation, evaluation and monitoring of all WSIS documents, both from the first and second phase, inclusive to persons with disabilities. We urge that persons with disabilities be included in all aspects of designing, developing, distributing and deploying of appropriate strategies for ICT, including information and communication services, so as to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities, taking into account the universal design principle and the use of assistive technologies. We request that any international, regional and national development program, funding or assistance aimed to achieve the inclusive information society be made disability-inclusive, both through mainstreaming and disability-specific approaches. We urge all governments to support the process of negotiation, adoption, ratification and implementation of the International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in particular through enactment of national legislation, as it contains strong elements concerning information and communication accessibility for persons with disabilities.

Health Information

Access to health information and knowledge is essential to collective and individual human development and has been identified as a critical factor in the public physical and mental health care crises around the world. The WSIS process has neglected to recognize that health is a cross-cutting issue and that health systems must include a holistic approach which is integral to the promotion of physical and mental health and the prevention and treatment of physical and mental illness for all people and to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

 

It is important to recognize that health expertise and scientific knowledge is essential to aid disease stricken, as well as traumatized populations affected by war, terrorism, disaster and other events, and further that the implementation of ICT systems for physical and mental health information and services must be a two-way path recognizing cultural and community norms and values.

 

It is essential that health care specialists, practitioners, and consumers participate in the development of public policy addressing privacy and related issues regarding physical and mental health information affecting information and delivery systems.

Children and Young People in the Information Society

In WSIS Phase I, the Geneva Declaration of Principles explicitly acknowledged young people, in paragraph 11, as the “future workforce and leading creators and earliest adopters of ICTs” and that to fully realize this end, youth must be “empowered as learners, developers, contributors, entrepreneurs and decision-makers.” The Tunis Commitment in paragraph 25 reaffirmed the strategic role of youth as stakeholders and partners in creating an inclusive Information Society. This recognition is further supported by paragraph 90 of the Tunis Agenda. However we are concerned as to how key decision-makers from Governments, the business community and Civil Society will realize this commitment when the existing structures are not open for genuine, full and effective participation by youth. None of the Tunis documents, specifically in the post-WSIS implementation and follow-up parts, clearly defines how youth shall be “actively engaged in innovative ICT-based development programmes and … in e-strategy processes,” as paragraph 25 states. In this regard, we call upon governments, both national and local, and the proponents of the Digital Solidarity Fund, to engage young people as digital opportunities are created and national e-strategies developed. Youth must be tapped as community leaders and volunteers for ICT for Development projects and be consulted in global and national ICT policy-making processes and formulation.

 

While we support the great opportunities that ICTs offer children and young people, paragraphs 90q of the Tunis Agenda and article 24 of the Tunis Commitment outline the potential dangers that children and young people face in relation to ICTs. For this reason, article 92 of the Tunis Agenda encourages all governments to support an easy to remember, free of charge, national number for all children in need of care and protection. However, we had hoped that WSIS would have encouraged every stakeholder to support a more comprehensive proposal that ensured that every child, especially those that are marginalized and disadvantaged, has free access to ICTs, including but not limited to, toll free landlines, mobile telephones and Internet connection. In this regard, strategies should be developed that allow children and young people to reap the benefits that ICTs offer by making ICT an integral part of the formal and informal education sectors. There should also be strategies that protect children and young people from the potential risks posed by new technologies, including access to inappropriate content, unwanted contact and commercial pressures, particularly with regards to pornography, pedophilia and sexual trafficking, while fully respecting human rights standards on freedom of expression. We are committed to work in the WSIS follow-up process towards a world where telecommunication allows children and young people to be heard one-by-one and, through their voices, to fulfil their rights and true potential to shape the world.

Ethical Dimensions

The Tunis texts would have clearly been stronger if the aspects of the Information Society being people-centred, human rights-based and sustainable development-oriented were seen as the ethical point of departure in human relationships and community building and equally in bodies of international agreements. These ethical dimensions are foundational to a just, equitable and sustainable information and knowledge society.

 

Geneva identified the ethical values of respect for peace and the fundamental values of freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, shared responsibility, and respect for nature as enunciated in the Millennium Declaration. Tunis should have improved on these by including the principles of trust, stewardship and shared responsibility together with digital solidarity. The technologies we develop, and the solidarities we forge, must build relationships and strengthen social cohesion

 

Human rights conventions, for example, are critically important in evaluating ICTs so that they are tools to enable just and peaceable conditions for humanity. But Tunis failed to point in this direction. It did not, for example, restate what Geneva considered as acts inimical to the Information Society such as racism, intolerance, hatred, violence and others.

 

The strong emphasis on technology in the Tunis texts must not eclipse the human being as the subject of communication and development. Our humanity rests in our capacity to communicate with each other and to create community. It is in the respectful dialogue and sharing of values among peoples, in the plurality of their cultures and civilizations, that meaningful and accountable communication thrives. The Tunis texts did not give clear indications on how this can happen.

 

In an age of economic globalization and commodification of knowledge, the ethics and values of justice, equity, participation and sustainability are imperative. Beyond Tunis, all stakeholders must be encouraged to weave ethics and values language into the working on semantic web knowledge structures. Communication rights and justice are about making human communities as technology’s home and human relationships as technology’s heart.

 

 

IV. Where to Go From Here – Our Tunis Commitment

 

Civil Society is committed to continuing its involvement in the future mechanisms for policy debate, implementation and follow-up on Information Society issues. To do this, Civil Society will build on the processes and structures that were developed during the WSIS process.

Element One: Evolution of Our Internal Organization

Civil Society will work on the continued evolution of its current structures. This will include the use of existing thematic caucuses and working groups, the possible creation of new caucuses, and the use of the Civil Society Plenary, the Civil Society Bureau, and the Civil Society Content and Themes Group. We will organise, at a date to be determined, to launch the process of creating a Civil Society charter.

Element Two: Involvement in the Internet Governance Forum

The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus will actively participate in and support the work of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), and is exploring ways to enhance its working methods and its engagement with relevant stakeholders, especially the research community, to these ends. In addition, the caucus is considering the creation of a new Working Group that will make recommendations on the IGF, and other Civil Society caucuses, and individual Civil Society Working Groups will develop ideas for and participate in the IGF as well.

Element Three: Involvement in Follow-Up and Implementation

In order to ensure that future implementation and follow-up mechanisms respect the spirit and letter of the Tunis documents and that governments uphold the commitments they have made during this second phase of the WSIS, Civil Society mechanisms will be used and created to ensure:

·         the proactive monitoring of and participation in the implementation of the Geneva Plan of Action and the Tunis Agenda at the national level;

·         a structured interaction with all UN agencies and international organisations and regional as well as national mechanisms for follow-up, to ensure that they integrate the WSIS objectives in their own work plans, and that they put in place effective mechanisms for multi-stakeholder interaction, as mentioned in paragraphs 100 and 101 of the Tunis Agenda;

·         that the Information Society as a complex social political phenomenon is not reduced to a technology-centred perspective. The ECOSOC Commission on Science and Technology for Development will have to change significantly its mandate and composition to adequately address the need for being an effective follow-up mechanism for WSIS while re-affirming its original mission of developing science and technology, in addition to ICT, for the development objectives of poor countries;

·         not only that the reformed Commission on Science and Technology for Development becomes a truly multi-stakeholder commission for the Information Society, but also, that the process to revise it's mandate, composition and agenda is done in a fully open and inclusive manner.

Element Four: Lessons Learned for the UN System in General

We see the WSIS process as an experience to be learned from for the overall UN system and related processes. We will therefore work with the United Nations and all stakeholders on:

·         developing clearer and less bureaucratic rules of recognition for accrediting Civil Society organisations in the UN system, for instance in obtaining ECOSOC status and summit accreditation, and to ensure that national governmental recognition of Civil Society entities is not the basis for official recognition in the UN system; and

·         ensuring that all future summit processes be multi–stakeholder in their approach, allowing for appropriate flexibility. This would be achieved either by recognition of precedents set in summit processes, or by formulating a rules of procedure manual to guide future summit processes and day-to-day Civil Society interaction with the international community.

Element five: Outreach to Other Constituencies

The civil society actors that actively participated in the WSIS process are conscious that the Information Society, as its name suggests, is a society-wide phenomenon, and that advocacy on Information Society issues need to include every responsible interest and group. We therefore commit ourselves in the post-WSIS period to work to broaden our reach to include different Civil Society constituencies that for various reasons have not been active in the WSIS process; may have shown scepticism over the role of ICT in their core areas of activity; or for other reasons have remained disengaged from the Information Society discourse.