URU, Alm.del - 2006-07 - Bilag 127: Beretning om FN's Verdenstopmøde om informationssamfundet (WSIPS) den 16.-18. november 2005 i Tunis, Tunesien

BeretningomFN’s Verdenstopmøde om informationssamfundetden 16.-18. novemberi Tunis, TunesienBaggrundFN’s generalforsamling gav den 21. december 2001 med resolution 56/183 Den InternationaleTelekommunikation Union (ITU) til opgave at forberede et verdenstopmøde om informations-samfundet (World Summit on the Information Society – WSIS). Resolutionen pegede blandtandet på behovet for at udnytte det store videnmæssige og teknologiske potentiale til at fremmede mål, som blev fastsat i sluterklæringen fra FN’s Millenium-topmøde i New York i 2000. I re-solutionen opfordredes såvel regeringer, civilsamfund og den private sektor til at deltage aktivt iforberedelsesprocessen.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. Uden-rigsministeriet og Videnskabsministeriet har i marts 2004 afgivet en beretning vedrørende top-mødets første fase i Genève, hvorfor nærværende beretning kun omhandler anden fase af top-møde, som fandt sted i Tunis den 16.-18. november 2005.Forberedelserne til topmødet i Tunis blev gennemført på regionalt og globalt niveau, ligesomder i mange lande også blev gennemført en national forberedelsesproces med relevante aktørerindenfor området. Der har på globalt niveau været afholdt tre forberedelseskonferencer (Prep-Com), hvoraf PrepCom 1 fandt sted i Hammamet i Tunesien i juni 2004, PrepCom 2 i Genèvei februar 2005 samt PrepCom 3 i Genève i september 2005. Forberedelseskonferencerne harhaft til opgave at forberede udkast til topmødets to slutdokumenter. Siden man imidlertid ikkekunne opnå enighed om udkast til slutdokumenter under den sidste forberedelseskonference iGenève i september 2005 blev konferencen genoptaget i Tunis den 13.-15. november 2005.EU afgav skriftlige bidrag til forberedelsesprocessen forud for de afholdte forberedelseskonfe-rencer, 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 tele-ministrenes møder i Rådet. EU-kommissionen har i lighed med praksis i forbindelse med andreverdenstopmøder vedtaget flere meddelelser om anden del af WSIS til Rådet, Europa-Parlamentet, Det Europæiske Økonomiske og Sociale Udvalg og Regionsudvalget, senest den2.juni 2005.1Udenrigsministeriet og Videnskabsministeriet har været ansvarlige for de danske forberedelsertil topmødet i Tunis, og der har været afholdt åbne debatmøder om WSIS den 11. november2004 og den 14. september 2005 med henblik på at modtage input fra og skabe dialog med ci-vilsamfundet, erhvervslivet, interesseorganisationer, forskningsverdenen, mediekredse og en-keltpersoner om emner for topmødet.Towards a Global Partnership in the Information Society: The Contribution of the Euroean Union to the Second Phase ofthe World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) – COM(2005)2341

Forberedelsesprocessen for Verdenstopmødet og InformationssamfundetForberedelsesprocessen for Verdenstopmødet i Tunis blev gennemført under ledelse af den let-tiske FN-ambassadør i Genève, ambassadør Janis Karklins. Det lykkedes ikke under den tredjeforberedelseskonference i september 2005 at nå til enighed om et udkast til slutdokumenter fortopmødet i Tunis, hvorfor det blev besluttet at suspendere forberedelseskonferencen i Genèveog genoptage konferencen i Tunis den 13.-15. november 2005 umiddelbart inden topmødetsbegyndelse.Derimod lykkedes det for den endelige forberedende konference i Tunis at nå til enighed omudkast til slutdokumenter natten inden topmødets påbegyndelse. Der opnåedes dog først enig-hed om de udviklingspolitiske og FN-relaterede emner efter, at der var fundet en tilfredsstillen-de løsning på topmødets hovedproblematik vedrørende den fremtidige konsultationsproces foren internationalisering af forvaltningen af internettet (Internet Governance).Forvaltningen af internettetI forhold til Internet Governance kom det til åben konflikt under PrepCom III i september2005. Konflikten omhandlede primært et forslag om, at de særlige kontrolfunktioner vedrø-rende internettets basale infrastruktur, som i dag udøves unilateralt af de amerikanske myn-digheder, skal overgå til et internationalt sammensat organ med afsæt i en mellemstatslig afta-le.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 fatpå problemstillingen vedrørende procedurerne for ændringer i den såkaldte ”root zone file”(den overordnede ”telefonbog” med basisoplysninger om identiteten på administratorer aftopdomænenavne, der er afgørende for, at internettrafikken fungerer korrekt, og at man vedsøgning på internettet finder den rigtige hjemmeside). Dette indebærer også principper forgodkendelse af nye generiske topdomænenavne (som f.eks. ”.com” og ”.net”) samt af æn-dringer vedrørende administrationen af landetopdomænenavne (f.eks. ”.dk” og ”.de”). Her-udover drejede det sig om ansvaret for det nødvendige beredskab, som skal sikre domæne-navnssystemets centrale funktioner, om at få indført et internationalt voldgiftssystem til at lø-se konflikter samt om at fastsætte overordnede principper for administrationen af de ”rootservers”, 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 omen tekst, der i vid udstrækning bygger på forslag fra EU. Dette skyldes ikke mindst en enestå-ende 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 del-tage i forvaltningen på lige fod, at regeringerne er ansvarlige for fastlæggelsen af globale prin-cipper for opgavefordelingen mellem regeringerne og andre aktører og for, at internettet admi-nistreres i overensstemmelse med berettigede offentlige interesser og international ret. Endelig

fastlægges rammerne for den proces, der skal føre til disse resultater. Aktørerne i denne procesbliver alle interessenter, og rammen om drøftelserne etableres i regi af relevante internationaleog/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 – medundtagelse af de spørgsmål, som relaterer direkte til forvaltningen af domænenavnssystemet.Hvad angik de udviklingspolitiske og FN-relaterede emner udestod der under forberedelses-konferencen to hovedproblemer i udkast til topmødets slutdokumenter, som det ikke var lyk-kedes at løse under den langvarige forudgående forhandlingsproces i Genève i september 2005.Forholdet mellem menneskerettigheder og statssuverænitetEU og WEOG-landene2USA, Canada, Schweiz og Norge modsatte sig diverse tekstforslag fraRusland, støttet af G-77-landene3(særligt den arabiske og den asiatiske gruppe), om at under-ordne basale frihedsrettigheder nationalstaters kontrol med henvisning til bl.a. sikkerhedsbehov.Også spørgsmålet om pressefrihed blev genstand for forsøg på udvanding fra særligt russiskside, men også hér lykkedes det for EU m.fl. at forhandle acceptabelt sprogbrug ind i doku-mentet.Implementering og opfølgning af WSIS processenDen primære uenighed vedrørende implementering og opfølgning på WSIS processen var kon-centreret omkring, hvem der skulle have det overordnede ansvar for implementeringen og op-følgningen på det officielle WSIS-resultat fra Tunis. Rusland støttet af bl.a. G-77-landene havdehele tiden ønsket at give International Telecommunication Union (ITU) en klar overordnet ko-ordinerende rolle i forbindelse med implementeringen og opfølgningen på WSIS, hvilket etdominerende flertal indenfor EU og WEOG-landene imidlertid ikke ønskede, da man hellere såimplementeringen og opfølgningen på WSIS integreret i FN’s normale opfølgningsprocesser,herunder mainstreamed indenfor de enkelt FN-organisationerne i henhold til deres mandat ogkompetenceområde. EU-holdningen var, at FN’s Generalsekretær selv måtte tage den endeligebeslutning herom og ikke påvirkes i den ene eller anden retning.Forhandlingerne i Tunis afspejlede den klassiske nord-syd polarisering, hvor et hårdt pressetEU i elvte time, konfronteret med truslen om forhandlingssammenbrud, måtte acceptere etkompromissprog, 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 nyeoperationelle enheder, men at opfølgningen skulle følge FN’s normale procedure for opfølg-ning på topmøder. Dertil kom, at det lykkedes at skabe en klar opdeling mellem aktørerne forhenholdsvis implementering og opfølgning samt at etablere en kobling mellem WSIS processenog 2015-målene. EU havde endvidere held med at få indplaceret implementeringsspørgsmålet iFN's eksisterende øverste bestyrelse ”Chief Executive Board”.

På negativsiden talte, at G-77-landene fik held med at få oprettet en særlig gruppe om informa-tionssamfundet under FN’s eksisterende ”Chief Executive Board”, samt at udpegning af for-mand herfor burde ske med behørig hensyntagen til ITU, UNESCO og UNDP, hvilket manfra EU’s side ikke på forhånd ønskede at lægge sig fast på. Ligeledes lykkedes det Rusland ogG-77-landene at få opbakning til et anneks i det operationelle afsnit med identifikation af le-dende FN-organisationer med hensyn til den under WSIS topmødet i Genève vedtagne hand-lingsplan, hvilket man fra EU’s side heller ikke ønskede at lægge sig fast på. I slutdokumentetsanneks figurerer FN (sær)organisationer som ITU, UNESCO, UNCTAD samt delvist UNDPprominent. Det lykkedes imidlertid for EU at få indsat en henvisning til, at annekset alene varindikativt, samt at der kun blev udpeget mulige facilitatorer og moderatorer. Dertil kom en ud-specificering af ”multi-stakeholder” tilgangen i annekset med henblik på at sikre inddragelse afprivatsektor og civilsamfund.For så vidt angik spørgsmålet om opfølgning lykkedes det G-77-landene at få denne placeret iKommissionen for Videnskab og Teknologi under ECOSOC, baseret på en kommendeECOSOC beslutning i 2006 om revideret mandat for og sammensætning af kommissionen. FraEU’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 implemen-tering af WSIS i 2015, om end EU havde held med at få afvist en mere formaliseret og automa-tisk opfølgningsproces.Finansielle spørgsmålForuden de to ovennævnte centrale hovedproblemstillinger omfattede drøftelserne også finan-sielle spørgsmål. Forhandlingerne vedrørende de finansielle mekanismer tog udgangspunkt i entekst udarbejdet af en arbejdsgruppe under formanden (Group Friends of the Chair), som varskrevet på baggrund af konklusionerne fra en UNDP arbejdsgruppe-rapport om de finansiellemekanismer. Rapporten understregede, at udviklingslandene burde indarbejde informations- ogkommunikationsteknologier (IKT) i modtagerlandenes fattigdomsstrategier samt udarbejde na-tionale IKT-strategier. Det fremgik ligeledes af rapporten, at der i arbejdsgruppen ikke kunneopnås enighed om, hvorvidt der ville være behov for en særlig finansieringsmekanisme eller etforum 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 finansie-ringsmekanismer på IKT-området, men at man derimod skulle lægger vægt på, at IKT blev in-tegreret via de eksisterende bistandsmekanismer, og at vurderingen af finansieringsbehovet tilsektoren skulle indgå i modtagerlandenes samlede planlægning af de nationale budgetter, her-under i landenes fattigdomsstrategier. Det lykkedes for EU at fastholde, at den i Genève færdig-forhandlede tekst vedrørende finansielle mekanismer blev baseret på frivillighedsaspektet, her-under at teksten fra topmødet i Genève vedrørende den frivillige Digitale Solidaritetsfond ikkeblev genåbnet, som ønsket fra udviklingslandenes side.Verdenstopmødets slutdokumenterDen genoptagne PrepCom 3 sluttede ved midnat den 15. november 2005 efter tre dages inten-sive forhandlinger og således inden den officielle åbning af Verdenstopmødet om Informati-onssamfundet dagen efter. Det lykkedes dog først at nå til enighed om de beskrevne udeståen-

de tekstafsnit efter, at der som beskrevet var fundet en tilfredsstillende løsning på topmødetshovedproblematik om den fremtidige internationale forvaltning af internettet.Udviklingslandenes gidselstagning af de beskrevne udestående problemstillinger, særligt for såvidt angik menneskerettigheder samt spørgsmålet om implementering af og opfølgning påWSIS processen, viste sig at være en effektiv strategi. Det endelige resultat på FN- og udvik-lingsbistandsområdet vurderedes derfor at være et i sidste instans for Danmark og EU accepta-belt kompromis, som ”tillæg” til topmødets hovedresultat vedrørende internettet.De under PrepCom 3 færdigforhandlede udkast til topmøde slutdokumenter, omfattede ”TunisCommitment” (introduktionen) og ”Tunis Agenda for the Information Society” (det operatio-nelle afsnit), blev godkendt uden ændringer under topmødet den 18. november 2005. Topmødeslut dokumenterne er vedlagt som henholdsvis bilag 2 og 3.Den danske delegationDepartementschef Uffe Toudal Pedersen fra Ministeriet for Videnskab, Teknologi og Udviklingledede under sin deltagelse i topmødet den 16.-18. november 2005 den danske delegation ogafgav det danske indlæg. Delegationen omfattede tillige medlemmer fra Folketinget, repræsen-tanter fra Udenrigsministeriet og Ministeriet for Videnskab, Teknologi og Udvikling samt detdanske civilsamfund. Delegationslisten er vedlagt som bilag 1.Den generelle debat under topmødetFN’s Generalsekretær, Kofi Annan, anførte bl.a. i sit indledende indlæg, at Verdenstopmødet iTunis gerne skulle føre til, at IKT-teknologier blev anvendt på nye måde, således at de medfør-te yderligere sociale fordele for alle klasse i verdenssamfundet. Mest af alt burde topmødet ge-nerere nyt momentum for de fattigste landes økonomiske og sociale udvikling. Forudsætningenfor informationssamfundet var imidlertid frihed. Det var denne frihed som gjorde det muligtfor journalister at arbejde samt for borger at tilegne sig den nødvendige viden til bl.a. at holderegeringerne ansvarlige for deres handlinger. Uden åbenhed og retten til at søge, modtage ogvidereformidle information og ideer gennem medier uden hensyn til grænser ville informations-samfundet være dødfødt.FN-systemet var rede til at hjælpe med implementeringen af topmødets resultater, herundervedrørende internettet. Imidlertid skulle der ikke være nogen tvivl om, at FN ikke var interesse-ret i at overtage eller føre opsyn med forvaltningen af internettet. USA skulle have en stor takfor at have udviklet internettet og gjort det tilgængelig for verden, men det stod klart for alle, atder i dag eksisterede et behov for yderligere international deltagelse i diskussionen omkring for-valtningen af internettet.Det britiske EU-formandskab repræsenteret ved den britiske Minister for Industri og regioner-ne, Alun Michael, anførte bl.a. i et indlæg på vegne af EU, at EU hilste forhandlingsresultatetvelkommen. Tunis-dagsordenen var et vigtig bidrag til den globale anstrengelse med at byggebro over den digitale kløft, således at man sikrede, at fordelene ved IKT kunne komme alle tilgode. EU så frem til at samarbejde med alle aktører, således at man sikrede en fuldstændig ogeffektiv implementering af begge faser af Verdenstopmødet om Informationssamfundet.

EU var verdens største donor, men på trods heraf havde man besluttet at fordoble sit budget tiludviklingsbistand inden år 2010. En stigende andel af EU’s udviklingsbistand blev givet sombudgetstøtte til udviklingslandenes egne udviklingsplaner og budgetter, således at landene selvkunne bestemme, hvor meget som skulle gå til IKT.Departementschef Uffe Toudal Pedersen understregede bl.a. i sit indlæg, at IKT i dag var denmest 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 menneskerslivskvalitet overalt i verden. Endvidere gjorde IKT det muligt for den enkelte at tage et størremedansvar for sit liv og deltage aktivt i samfundsudviklingen, hvorved man også forbedrededemokratisering og menneskerettigheder. Verdenstopmødet var af vital betydning, hvis manønskede 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 medat have en førerrolle i udviklingen af internettet. Derfor var det vigtigt, at man fandt en sandmåde at sikre legitimiteten af forvaltningen af internettet på. Løsningen var et forvaltningssy-stem på internationalt niveau, som ikke kunne introducere nogen form for indholdskontrolmed internettet, og som samtidigt kunne beskytte kernen af internettets infrastruktur.Alle parter burde også arbejde hårdere for at sikre ytringsfriheden, som var informationssam-fundets mest vitale byggesten. Lande som ikke forstod dette princip ville i det lange løb tabe iden globale konkurrence om investeringer og økonomisk udvikling. Hvert land burde derforsætte udviklingen af informationssamfundet høj på den nationale dagsorden. Udviklingslandenehavde specielt behov for at integrere deres nationale e-strategier i landenes fattigdomsstrategier.Den danske standDanmark deltog med en stand på den åbne platform ICT4all (ICT for All) i forbindelse medVerdenstopmødet 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 påplatformen, hvor informations- og kommunikationsteknologiernes udviklingsperspektiver blevdrøftet og belyst gennem hundredvis af rundbordsdiskussioner, foredrag og konferencer.Danmark var repræsenteret på platformen med 12 deltagere fra 5 danske virksomheder samtUdenrigsministeriet, som redegjorde for ministeriets nye portal for integreringen af IKT i ud-viklingsbistanden. Departementschef Uffe Toudal Pedersen var vært ved standens åbningsre-ception, hvori deltog repræsentanter fra tilrejsende delegationer samt en lang række udenland-ske organisationer.FN-forbundet i Danmark koordinerede i samarbejde med den internationale sammenslutningaf FN-forbund (WFUNA) det danske civilsamfunds repræsentation på ICT4all, hvor man hav-de en fælles stand. FN-forbundet havde med økonomisk støtte fra Udenrigsministeriet inviteretsamarbejdspartnere fra civilsamfundet i seks udviklingslande til at repræsentere deres lande påICT4all. Standen var godt besøgt, og der var især stor interesse for de nye muligheder for globalkommunikation, som blev præsenteret.

Pressedækning og formidlingI forbindelse med Verdenstopmødet og standen deltog journalister fra danske medier. Som delaf de danske forberedelser til ICT4all blev der oprettet en hjemmeside (www.ict4all.dk), hvorinformation om Verdenstopmødet og den tilknyttede platform blev formidlet til de danske del-tagere. Samtidig fungerede hjemmesiden som kommunikationsredskab mellem deltagerne i pe-rioden frem mod topmødet. Under selve afviklingen af topmødet og ICT4all-platformen varhjemmesiden kernen til formidling og overblik, og hjemmesiden vil forblive tilgængelig i seksmåneder efter topmødet.Civilsamfundets erklæring til WSIS-topmødetUnder første fase af WSIS formulerede de deltagende civilsamfundsorganisationer en særskiltdeklaration, som siden blev annekteret til den officielle Genève Deklaration. Denne deklarationhavde til hensigt at give civilsamfundets sammenhængende bud på fremtidens informations-samfund, udover de forslag der blev inkorporeret i den officielle erklæring.Under topmødets anden fase i Tunis arbejdede civilsamfundsorganisationerne med at formule-re en særskilt erklæring, der supplerede deklarationen fra Geneve og som særligt gjorde statusover civilsamfundets arbejde og rolle i den forgangne proces, civilsamfundets fremtidige rollesamt de opnåede tiltag. På grund af en meget hektisk optaktsfase og ikke mindst på grund afsværere arbejdsvilkår for civilsamfundet under Tunis-topmødet, blev erklæringen ikke færdigar-bejdet under selve topmødet. Civilsamfundets erklæringen blev derfor først færdigudarbejdet ogoffentliggjort ultimo december 2005 under titlen ”Much more could have been achieved”. Er-klæringen vedlægges som bilag 7.

Bilag 1:Liste over deltagere i den danske delegationMr Uffe Toudal PEDERSEN, Permanent Secretary, Delegation of DenmarkMr Finn JØNCK, Head of Department, Delegation of DenmarkMs Marianne ROENNEBAEK, Deputy Permanent Secretary, Delegation of DenmarkH.E. Mr Bo Eric WEBER, Ambassador, Delegation of DenmarkMs Sidse AEGIDIUS, Head of Department, Delegation of Denmark, [email protected]Ms Karen Munk CHRISTENSEN, Head of Secretariat of the Committee on Science andTechnology, Delegation of DenmarkMs Jane FINNERUP JOHNSEN, Project-coordinator, Delegation of DenmarkMs Rikke FRANK JØRGENSEN, Special Advisor, Delegation of DenmarkMs Maj HESSEL, First Secretary, Delegation of DenmarkMr Magnus HEUNICKE, Member of Parliament, Delegation of DenmarkMr Henrik KJAER, Special Adviser, Delegation of DenmarkMr Torben KROGH, Chairman, Delegation of DenmarkMr Martin MIKKELSEN, Head of Section, Delegation of DenmarkMr Torsten Schack PEDERSEN, Member of Parliament, Delegation of DenmarkMs Kirstine SCHJERMER, Web Coordinator, Delegation of DenmarkMr Jørgen TRANBERG, Minister Counsellor, Delegation of Denmark

TUNIS COMMITMENT1.We, the representatives of the peoples of the world,have gathered in Tunisfrom 16-18 November 2005 for this second phase of the World Summit on the InformationSociety (WSIS) to reiterate our unequivocal support for the Geneva Declaration of Principlesand Plan of Action adopted at the first phase of the World Summit on the Information Societyin Geneva in December 2003.2. We reaffirmour desire and commitment to build a people-centred, inclusive and develop-ment-oriented Information Society, premised on the purposes and principles of the Charter ofthe United Nations, international law and multilateralism, and respecting fully and upholdingthe Universal Declaration of Human Rights, so that people everywhere can create, access, util-ize and share information and knowledge, to achieve their full potential and to attain the inter-nationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium DevelopmentGoals.3.We reaffirmthe universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of all humanrights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, as enshrined in the Vien-na Declaration.We also reaffirmthat democracy, sustainable development, and respect forhuman rights and fundamental freedoms as well as good governance at all levels are interde-pendent and mutually reinforcing.We further resolveto strengthen respect for the rule of lawin international as in national affairs.4.We reaffirmparagraphs 4, 5 and 55 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles.We recognizethat freedom of expression and the free flow of information, ideas, and knowledge, are essentialfor the Information Society and beneficial to development.5.The Tunis Summit represents a unique opportunity to raise awareness of the bene-fits that Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) can bring to humanity and themanner in which they can transform people’s activities, interaction and lives, and thus increaseconfidence in the future.6.ThisSummit is an important stepping-stone in the world’s efforts to eradicate poverty and toattain the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the MillenniumDevelopment Goals. By the Geneva decisions, we established a coherent long-term link be-tween the WSIS process, and other relevant major United Nations conferences and summits.We call upongovernments, private sector, civil society and international organizations to jointogether to implement the commitments set forth in the Geneva Declaration of Principles andPlan of Action. In this context, the outcomes of the recently concluded2005 World Summit onthe review of the implementation of the Millennium Declarationare of special relevance.7. We reaffirm the commitments made in Genevaand build on them in Tunis by focusingon financial mechanisms for bridging the digital divide, on Internet governance and related is-sues, as well as on follow-up and implementation of the Geneva and Tunis decisions, as refe-renced in the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society.

8.While reaffirming the important roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders as outlined inparagraph 3 of the Geneva Plan of Action,we acknowledgethe key role and responsibilitiesof governments in the WSIS process.9.We reaffirm our resolutionin the quest to ensure that everyone can benefit from the oppor-tunities that ICTs can offer, by recalling that governments, as well as private sector, civil societyand the United Nations and other international organizations, should work together to: im-prove access to information and communication infrastructure and technologies as well as toinformation 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 re-spect cultural diversity; recognize the role of the media; address the ethical dimensions of theInformation Society; and encourage international and regional cooperation.We confirmthatthese are the key principles for building an inclusive Information Society, the elaboration ofwhich is found in the Geneva Declaration of Principles.10.We recognizethat access to information and sharing and creation of knowledge contributessignificantly to strengthening economic, social and cultural development, thus helping all coun-tries to reach the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millen-nium Development Goals. This process can be enhanced by removing barriers to universal,ubiquitous, equitable and affordable access to information.We underlinethe importance ofremoving barriers to bridging the digital divide, particularly those that hinder the full achieve-ment of the economic, social and cultural development of countries and the welfare of theirpeople, in particular, in developing countries.11.Furthermore,ICTs are making it possible for a vastly larger population than at any time inthe past to join in sharing and expanding the base of human knowledge, and contributing to itsfurther growth in all spheres of human endeavour as well as its application to education, healthand science. ICTs have enormous potential to expand access to quality education, to boost lite-racy and universal primary education, and to facilitate the learning process itself, thus laying thegroundwork for the establishment of a fully inclusive and development-oriented InformationSociety and knowledge economy which respects cultural and linguistic diversity.12. We emphasizethat the adoption of ICTs by enterprises plays a fundamental role in eco-nomic growth. The growth and productivity enhancing effects of well-implemented invest-ments 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 adop-tion of ICTs.We invitegovernments and the private sector to enhance the capacity of Small,Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), since they furnish the greatest number of jobs inmost economies.We shall work together,with all stakeholders, to put in place the necessarypolicy, legal and regulatory frameworks that foster entrepreneurship, particularly for SMMEs.13.We also recognizethat the ICT revolution can have a tremendous positive impact as an in-strument of sustainable development. In addition, an appropriate enabling environment at na-tional and international levels could prevent increasing social and economic divisions, and thewidening of the gap between rich and poor countries, regions, and individuals—including be-tween men and women.14.We also recognizethat in addition to building ICT infrastructure, there shouldbe 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 tobuilding a global Information Society.15.Recognizing the principles of universal and non-discriminatory access to ICTs forall nations, the need to take into account the level of social and economic development of eachcountry, and respecting the development-oriented aspects of the Information Society,we un-derscorethat ICTs are effective tools to promote peace, security and stability, to enhance de-mocracy, social cohesion, good governance and the rule of law, at national, regional and inter-national levels. ICTs can be used to promote economic growth and enterprise development. In-frastructure development, human capacity building, information security and network securityare critical to achieve these goals.We further recognizethe need to effectively confront chal-lenges and threats resulting from use of ICTs for purposes that are inconsistent with objectivesof maintaining international stability and security and may adversely affect the integrity of theinfrastructure within States, to the detriment of their security. It is necessary to prevent theabuse of information resources and technologies for criminal and terrorist purposes, while res-pecting human rights.16. We further commit ourselvesto evaluate and follow up progress in bridging the digitaldivide, taking into account different levels of development, so as to reach internationally agreeddevelopment goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, and to assessthe effectiveness of investment and international cooperation efforts in building the Informa-tion Society.17. We urge governments,using the potential of ICTs, to create public systems of informa-tion on laws and regulations, envisaging a wider development of public access points and sup-porting the broad availability of this information.18.We shall striveunremittingly, therefore, to promote universal, ubiquitous, equita-ble and affordable access to ICTs, including universal design and assistive technologies, for allpeople, especially those with disabilities, everywhere, to ensure that the benefits are more even-ly distributed between and within societies, and to bridge the digital divide in order to createdigital opportunities for all and benefit from the potential offered by ICTs for development.19.The international community should take necessary measures to ensure that allcountries of the world have equitable and affordable access to ICTs, so that their benefits in thefields of socio-economic development and bridging the digital divide are truly inclusive.20.To that end,we shall pay particular attentionto the special needs of margina-lized and vulnerable groups of society including migrants, internally displaced persons and ref-ugees, unemployed and underprivileged people, minorities and nomadic people, older personsand persons with disabilities.21.To that end,we shall pay special attentionto the particular needs of people ofdeveloping countries, countries with economies in transition, Least Developed Countries, SmallIsland Developing States, Landlocked Developing Countries, Highly Indebted Poor Countries,countries and territories under occupation, and countries recovering from conflict or naturaldisasters.22.In the evolution of the Information Society, particular attention must be given tothe special situation of indigenous peoples, as well as to the preservation of their heritage andtheir cultural legacy.23.We recognizethat a gender divide exists as part of the digital divide in societyandwe reaffirm our commitmentto women’s empowerment and to a gender equality per-

spective, so that we can overcome this divide.We further acknowledgethat the full participa-tion of women in the Information Society is necessary to ensure the inclusiveness and respectfor human rights within the Information Society.We encourageall stakeholders to supportwomen’s participation in decision-making processes and to contribute to shaping all spheres ofthe Information Society at international, regional and national levels.24.We recognizethe role of ICTs in the protection of children and in enhancing thedevelopment of children.We will strengthen actionto protect children from abuse and de-fend their rights in the context of ICTs. In that context,we emphasizethat the best interestsof the child are a primary consideration.25.We reaffirm our commitmentto empowering young people as key contributorsto building an inclusive Information Society.We will actively engageyouth in innovativeICT-based development programmes and widen opportunities for youth to be involved in e-strategy processes.26.We recognizethe importance of creative content and applications to overcomethe digital divide and to contribute to the achievement of the internationally agreed develop-ment goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.27.We recognizethat equitable and sustainable access to information requires theimplementation of strategies for the long-term preservation of the digital information that isbeing created.28.We reaffirm our desireto build ICT networks and develop applications, in part-nership with the private sector, based on open or interoperable standards that are affordableand accessible to all, available anywhere and anytime, to anyone and on any device, leading to aubiquitous network.29. Our convictionis that governments, the private sector, civil society, the scientific andacademic community, and users can utilize various technologies and licensing models, includingthose developed under proprietary schemes and those developed under open-source and freemodalities, in accordance with their interests and with the need to have reliable services andimplement effective programmes for their people. Taking into account the importance of pro-prietary software in the markets of the countries,we reiteratethe need to encourage and fostercollaborative development, interoperative platforms and free and open-source software, in waysthat reflect the possibilities of different software models, notably for education, science anddigital inclusion programmes.30.Recognizing that disaster mitigation can significantly support efforts to bringabout sustainable development and help in poverty reduction,we reaffirm our commitmentto leveraging ICT capabilities and potential through fostering and strengthening cooperation atthe national, regional, and international levels.31.We commit ourselvesto work together towards the implementation of the Digi-tal Solidarity Agenda, as agreed in paragraph 27 of the Geneva Plan of Action. The full andquick implementation of that agenda, observing good governance at all levels, requires in par-ticular a timely, effective, comprehensive and durable solution to the debt problems of develop-ing countries where appropriate, a universal, rule-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitablemultilateral trading system, that can also stimulate development worldwide, benefiting countriesat all stages of development, as well as, to seek and effectively implement concrete internationalapproaches and mechanisms to increase international cooperation and assistance to bridge thedigital divide.

32.We further commitourselves to promote the inclusion of all peoples in the In-formation Society through the development and use of local and/or indigenous languages inICTs.We will continueour efforts to protect and promote cultural diversity, as well as cul-tural identities, within the Information Society.33.We acknowledgethat, while technical cooperation can help, capacity building atall 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 andfinancial, in accordance with chapter two of the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, toenable 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 ofthe outcomes of WSIS.35.We recognizethe central role of public policy in setting the framework in whichresource mobilization can take place.36.We valuethe potential of ICTs to promote peace and to prevent conflict which,inter alia,negatively affects achieving development goals. ICTs can be used for identifying con-flict situations through early-warning systems preventing conflicts, promoting their peacefulresolution, supporting humanitarian action, including protection of civilians in armed conflicts,facilitating peacekeeping missions, and assisting post conflict peace-building and reconstruc-tion.37. We are convincedthat our goals can be accomplished through the involvement, coop-eration and partnership of governments and other stakeholders, i.e. the private sector, civil so-ciety and international organizations, and that international cooperation and solidarity at all le-vels are indispensable if the fruits of the Information Society are to benefit all.38.Our effortsshould not stop with the conclusion of the Summit. The emergenceof the global Information Society to which we all contribute provides increasing opportunitiesfor all our peoples and for an inclusive global community that were unimaginable only a fewyears ago.We must harnessthese opportunities today and support their further developmentand progress.39.We reaffirmour strong resolve to develop and implement an effective and sus-tainable response to the challenges and opportunities of building a truly global Information So-ciety that benefits all our peoples.40.We strongly believein the full and timely implementation of the decisions wetook in Geneva and Tunis, as outlined in the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society._________

3.We thankthe UN Secretary-General for his efforts in creating the Task Force onFinancial Mechanisms (TFFM) and we commend the members on their report.4.We recallthat the mandate of the TFFM was to undertake a thorough review ofthe adequacy of existing financial mechanisms in meeting the challenges of ICT for develop-ment.5.The TFFM report sets out the complexity of existing mechanisms, both privateand public, which provide financing for ICTs in developing countries. It identifies areas wherethese could be improved and where ICTs could be given higher priority by developing coun-tries and their development partners.6.Based on the conclusion of the review of the report,we have consideredthe im-provements and innovations of financial mechanisms, including the creation of a voluntaryDigital Solidarity Fund, as mentioned in the Geneva Declaration of Principles.7.We recognizethe existence of the digital divide and the challenges that this posesfor many countries, which are forced to choose between many competing objectives in theirdevelopment planning and in demands for development funds whilst having limited resources.8.We recognizethe scale of the problem in bridging the digital divide, which willrequire adequate and sustainable investments in ICT infrastructure and services, and capacitybuilding, and transfer of technology over many years to come.9.We call upon the international communityto promote the transfer of technol-ogy on mutually agreed terms, including ICTs, to adopt policies and programmes with a view toassisting developing countries to take advantage of technology in their pursuit of developmentthrough,inter alia,technical cooperation and the building of scientific and technological capacityin our efforts to bridge the digital and development divides.10.We recognizethat the internationally agreed development goals and objectives,including the Millennium Development Goals, are fundamental. The Monterrey Consensus onFinancing for Development is the basis for the pursuit of adequate and appropriate financialmechanisms to promote ICT for development, in accordance with the Digital Solidarity Agen-da of the Geneva Plan of Action.

11.We recognize and acknowledgethe special and specific funding needs of thedeveloping 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 ontheir special financing needs to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objec-tives, including the Millennium Development Goals.12.We agreethat the financing of ICT for development needs to be placed in thecontext of the growing importance of the role of ICTs, not only as a medium of communica-tion, but also as a development enabler, and as a tool for the achievement of the internationallyagreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.13.In the past, financing of ICT infrastructure in most developing countries has beenbased on public investment. Lately, a significant influx of investment has taken place whereprivate-sector participation has been encouraged, based on a sound regulatory framework, andwhere public policies aimed at bridging the digital divide have been implemented.14.We are greatly encouragedby the fact that advances in communication technol-ogy, and high-speed data networks are continuously increasing the possibilities for developingcountries, and countries with economies in transition, to participate in the global market forICT-enabled services on the basis of their comparative advantage. These emerging opportuni-ties 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 inICT infrastructure and for the development of new services. At the same time, countries shouldpursue policies and measures that would not discourage, impede or prevent the continued par-ticipation of these countries in the global market for ICT-enabled services.15.We take notethat the challenges for expanding the scope of useful accessible in-formation content in the developing world are numerous; in particular, the issue of financingfor various forms of content and applications requires new attention, as this area has oftenbeen overlooked by the focus on ICT infrastructure.16.We recognizethat attracting investment in ICTs has depended crucially upon anenabling environment, including good governance at all levels, and a supportive, transparentand pro-competitive policy and regulatory framework, reflecting national realities.17.We endeavourto engage in a proactive dialogue on matters related to corporatesocial responsibility and good corporate governance of transnational corporations and theircontribution to the economic and social development of developing countries in our efforts tobridge the digital divide.18.We underlinethat market forces alone cannot guarantee the full participation ofdeveloping countries in the global market for ICT-enabled services. Therefore,we encouragethe strengthening of international cooperation and solidarity aimed at enabling all countries, es-pecially those referred to in paragraph 16 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles, to developICT infrastructure and ICT-enabled services that are viable and competitive at national and in-ternational levels.For reference, Paragraph 16 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles reads as follows:We continue to payspecial attention to the particular needs of people of developing countries, countries with economiesin transition, Least Developed Countries, Small Island Developing States, Landlocked Developing Countries, Highly In-debted Poor Countries, countries and territories under occupation, countries recovering from conflict and countries and re-gions with special needs as well as to conditions that pose severe threats to development, such as natural disasters.*

19.We recognize that,in addition to the public sector, financing of ICT infrastruc-ture by the private sector has come to play an important role in many countries and that do-mestic financing is being augmented by North-South flows and South-South cooperation.20.We recognizethat, as a result of the growing impact of sustainable private-sectorinvestment in infrastructure, multilateral and bilateral public donors are redirecting public re-sources to other development objectives, including Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers and re-lated programmes, policy reforms and mainstreaming of ICTs and capacity development.Weencourageall governments to give appropriate priority to ICTs, including traditional ICTssuch as broadcast radio and television, in their national development strategies.We also en-couragemultilateral institutions as well as bilateral public donors to consider also providingmore financial support for regional and large-scale national ICT infrastructure projects and re-lated capacity development. They should consider aligning their aid and partnership strategieswith the priorities set by developing countries and countries with economies in transition intheir national development strategies including their poverty reduction strategies.21.We recognizethat public finance plays a crucial role in providing ICT access andservices to rural areas and disadvantaged populations including those in Small Island Develop-ing States and Landlocked Developing Countries.22.We notethat ICT-related capacity-building needs represent a high priority in alldeveloping countries and the current financing levels have not been adequate to meet theneeds, although there are many different funding mechanisms supporting ICTs for develop-ment.23.We recognizethat there are a number of areas in need of greater financial re-sources and where current approaches to ICT for development financing have devoted insuffi-cient attention to date. These include:a)ICT capacity-building programmes, materials, tools, educational funding and specializedtraining initiatives, especially for regulators and other public-sector employees and or-ganizations.b)Communications access and connectivity for ICT services and applications in remote ruralareas, Small Island Developing States, Landlocked Developing Countries and other locationspresenting unique technological and market challenges.c)Regional backbone infrastructure, regional networks, Network Access Points and related re-gional projects, to link networks across borders and in economically disadvantaged regionswhich 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 newusers.e)Coordinated assistance, as appropriate, for countries referred to in paragraph 16 of the GenevaDeclaration of Principles, particularly Least Developed Countries and Small Island DevelopingStates, in order to improve effectiveness and to lower transaction costs associated with the de-livery of international donor support.f)ICT applications and content aimed at the integration of ICTs into the implementation of po-verty eradication strategies and in sector programmes, particularly in health, education, agricul-ture and the environment.

g)Sustainability of Information Society related projects, for example the maintenance ofICT infrastructure.h)Special needs of Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), such as funding re-quirements.i)Local development and manufacturing of ICT applications and technologies by develop-ing countries.j)Activities on ICT-related institutional reform and enhanced capacity on legal and regula-tory framework.k)Improving organizational structures and business-process change aimed at optimizingthe impact and effectiveness of ICT projects and other projects with significant ICTcomponents;l)Local government and initiatives based in local communities that deliver ICT services tocommunities in areas such as education, health and livelihood support.24.Recognizing that the central responsibility for coordination of public financingprogrammes and public ICT development initiatives rests with governments,we recommendthat further cross-sectoral and cross-institutional coordination should be undertaken, both onthe part of donors and recipients within the national framework.25.Multilateral development banks and institutions should consider adapting their ex-isting mechanisms, and where appropriate designing new ones, to provide for national and re-gional demands on ICT development.26.We acknowledgethe following prerequisites for equitable and universal accessi-bility to, and better utilization of, financial mechanisms:a)Creating policy and regulatory incentives aimed at universal access and the attraction ofprivate-sector investment.b)Identification and acknowledgement of the key role of ICTs in national developmentstrategies, and their elaboration, when appropriate, in conjunction with e-strategies.c)Developing institutional and implementation capacity to support the use of nationaluniversal service/access funds, and further study of these mechanisms and those aimingto mobilize domestic resources.d)Encouraging the development of locally relevant information, applications and servicesthat 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 achiev-ing Information Society objectives, especially in the public sector.h)Encouraging business-sector entities to help jump-start wider demand for ICT servicesby supporting creative industries, local producers of cultural content and applications aswell as small businesses.i)Strengthening capacities to enhance the potential of securitized funds and utilizing themeffectively.

27.We recommendimprovements and innovations in existing financing mechan-isms, including:a)Improving financial mechanisms to make financial resources become adequate, more predicta-ble, preferably untied, and sustainable.b)Enhancing regional cooperation and creating multi-stakeholder partnerships, especially bycreating 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 InternetExchange Points to reduce interconnection cost and broaden network access;ii.encouraging ITU to continue the study of the question of International InternetConnectivity (IIC) as an urgent matter to develop appropriate Recommendations.d)Coordinating programmes among governments and major financial players to mitigateinvestment risks and transaction costs for operators entering less attractive rural andlow-income market segments.e)Helping to accelerate the development of domestic financial instruments, including bysupporting local microfinance instruments, ICT business incubators, public credit in-struments, reverse auction mechanisms, networking initiatives based on local communi-ties, digital solidarity and other innovations.f)Improving the ability to access financing facilities with a view to accelerating the paceof 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 utilityof creating a virtual forum for the sharing of information by all stakeholders on poten-tial projects, on sources of financing and on institutional financial mechanisms.h)Enabling developing countries to be increasingly able to generate funds for ICTs and todevelop financial instruments, including trust funds and seed capital adapted to theireconomies.i)Urging all countries to make concrete efforts to fulfil their commitments under theMonterrey Consensus.j)Multilateral, regional and bilateral development organizations should consider cooperat-ing to enhance their capacity to provide rapid response with a view to supporting de-veloping 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 Ge-neva Plan of Action, includinginter aliadebt cancellation and debt swapping, that maybe used for financing ICT for development projects, including those within the frame-work of Poverty Reduction Strategies.28.We welcome the Digital Solidarity Fund (DSF)established in Geneva as aninnovative financial mechanism of a voluntary nature open to interested stakeholders with theobjective of transforming the digital divide into digital opportunities for the developing worldby focusing mainly on specific and urgent needs at the local level and seeking new voluntarysources of “solidarity” finance. The DSF will complement existing mechanisms for funding theInformation Society, which should continue to be fully utilized to fund the growth of new ICTinfrastructure and services.

INTERNET GOVERNANCE29.We reaffirm the principlesenunciated in the Geneva phase of the WSIS, in De-cember 2003, that the Internet has evolved into a global facility available to the public and itsgovernance should constitute a core issue of the Information Society agenda. The internationalmanagement of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the fullinvolvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations. Itshould ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stableand secure functioning of the Internet, taking into account multilingualism.30.We acknowledgethat the Internet, a central element of the infrastructure of theInformation Society, has evolved from a research and academic facility into a global facilityavailable to the public.31.We recognizethat Internet governance, carried out according to the Genevaprinciples, is an essential element for a people-centred, inclusive, development-oriented andnon-discriminatory Information Society. Furthermore, we commit ourselves to the stability andsecurity of the Internet as a global facility and to ensuring the requisite legitimacy of its govern-ance, based on the full participation of all stakeholders, from both developed and developingcountries, within their respective roles and responsibilities.32.We thankthe UN Secretary-General for establishing the Working Group onInternet Governance (WGIG).We commendthe chairman, members and secretariat for theirwork and for their report.33.We take noteof the WGIG’s report that has endeavoured to develop a workingdefinition of Internet governance. It has helped identify a number of public policy issues thatare relevant to Internet governance. The report has also enhanced our understanding of the re-spective roles and responsibilities of governments, intergovernmental and international organi-zations and other forums as well as the private sector and civil society from both developingand developed countries.34.A working definition of Internet governance is the development and applicationby governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared princi-ples, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution anduse of the Internet.35.We reaffirmthat the management of the Internet encompasses both technical andpublic policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and in-ternational 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 develop-ment of the Internet, both in the technical and economic fields.c)Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters, especially at communitylevel, and should continue to play such a role.d)Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to have, a facilitating role inthe coordination of Internet-related public policy issues.e)International organizations have also had and should continue to have an important role inthe development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant policies.

36.We recognizethe valuable contribution by the academic and technical communi-ties within those stakeholder groups mentioned in paragraph 35 to the evolution, functioningand development of the Internet.37.We seek to improvethe coordination of the activities of international and inter-governmental organizations and other institutions concerned with Internet governance and theexchange of information among themselves. A multi-stakeholder approach should be adopted,as far as possible, at all levels.38.We call forthe reinforcement of specialized regional Internet resource manage-ment institutions to guarantee the national interest and rights of countries in that particular re-gion to manage their own Internet resources, while maintaining global coordination in this area.39.We seekto build confidence and security in the use of ICTs by strengthening thetrust framework.We reaffirmthe necessity to further promote, develop and implement in co-operation with all stakeholders a global culture of cybersecurity, as outlined in UNGA Resolu-tion 57/239 and other relevant regional frameworks. This culture requires national action andincreased international cooperation to strengthen security while enhancing the protection ofpersonal information, privacy and data. Continued development of the culture of cybersecurityshould enhance access and trade and must take into account the level of social and economicdevelopment of each country and respect the development-oriented aspects of the InformationSociety.40.We underlinethe importance of the prosecution of cybercrime, including cyber-crime committed in one jurisdiction, but having effects in another.We further underlinethenecessity of effective and efficient tools and actions, at national and international levels, topromote international cooperation among,inter alia,law-enforcement agencies on cybercrime.We call upon governmentsin cooperation with other stakeholders to develop necessary legis-lation for the investigation and prosecution of cybercrime, noting existing frameworks, for ex-ample, UNGA Resolutions 55/63 and 56/121 on “Combatingthe criminal misuse of information tech-nologies”and regional initiatives including, but not limited to, the Council of Europe'sConventionon Cybercrime.41.We resolve to deal effectivelywith the significant and growing problem posedby spam.We take noteof current multilateral, multi-stakeholder frameworks for regional andinternational cooperation on spam, for example, the APEC Anti-Spam Strategy, the LondonAction Plan, the Seoul-Melbourne Anti–Spam Memorandum of Understanding and the rele-vant activities of OECD and ITU.We call uponall stakeholders to adopt a multi-pronged ap-proach to counter spam that includes,inter alia,consumer and business education; appropriatelegislation, law-enforcement authorities and tools; the continued development of technical andself-regulatory measures; best practices; and international cooperation.42.We reaffirm our commitmentto the freedom to seek, receive, impart and use in-formation, in particular, for the creation, accumulation and dissemination of knowledge.We af-firmthat measures undertaken to ensure Internet stability and security, to fight cybercrime andto counter spam, must protect and respect the provisions for privacy and freedom of expres-sion as contained in the relevant parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and theGeneva Declaration of Principles.43.We reiterateour commitments to the positive uses of the Internet and otherICTs and to take appropriate actions and preventive measures, as determined by law, against

abusive uses of ICTs as mentioned under theEthical Dimensions of the Information Societyof theGeneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action.44.We also underlinethe importance of countering terrorism in all its forms andmanifestations on the Internet, while respecting human rights and in compliance with other ob-ligations under international law, as outlined in UNGA A/60/L.1 with reference to Article 85of the2005 World Summit Outcome.45.We underlinethe importance of the security, continuity and stability of the Inter-net, and the need to protect the Internet and other ICT networks from threats and vulnerabili-ties.We affirmthe need for a common understanding of the issues of Internet security, and forfurther cooperation to facilitate outreach, the collection and dissemination of security-relatedinformation and exchange of good practice among all stakeholders on measures to combat se-curity threats, at national and international levels.46.We call upon all stakeholdersto ensure respect for privacy and the protectionof personal information and data, whether via adoption of legislation, the implementation ofcollaborative frameworks, best practices and self-regulatory and technological measures bybusiness and users.We encourage all stakeholders,in particular governments, to reaffirm theright of individuals to access information according to the Geneva Declaration of Principlesand other mutually agreed relevant international instruments, and to coordinate internationallyas appropriate.47.We recognizethe increasing volume and value of all e-business, both within andacross national boundaries.We call forthe development of national consumer-protection lawsand practices, and enforcement mechanisms where necessary, to protect the right of consumerswho purchase goods and services online, and for enhanced international cooperation to facili-tate 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 satisfactionthe increasing use of ICT by governments to serve cit-izens and encourage countries that have not yet done so to develop national programmes andstrategies for e-government.49.We reaffirm our commitmentto turning the digital divide into digital opportuni-ty, andwe committo ensuring harmonious and equitable development for all.We committofoster and provide guidance on development areas in the broader Internet governance ar-rangements, and to include, amongst other issues, international interconnection costs, capacitybuilding and technology/know-how transfer.We encouragethe realization of multilingualismin the Internet development environment, andwe supportthe development of software thatrenders itself easily to localization, and enables users to choose appropriate solutions from dif-ferent software models including open-source, free and proprietary software.50.We acknowledgethat there are concerns, particularly amongst developing coun-tries, that the charges for international Internet connectivity should be better balanced to en-hance access.We therefore call forthe development of strategies for increasing affordableglobal connectivity, thereby facilitating improved and equitable access for all, by:a)Promoting Internet transit and interconnection costs that are commercially negotiated ina competitive environment and that should be oriented towards objective, transparentand 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).

f)Encouraging Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other parties in the commercial ne-gotiations to adopt practices towards attainment of fair and balanced interconnectivitycosts.g)Encouraging relevant parties to commercially negotiate reduced interconnection costsfor Least Developed Countries (LDCs), taking into account the special constraints ofLDCs.51.We encouragegovernments and other stakeholders, through partnerships whereappropriate, to promote ICT education and training in developing countries, by establishing na-tional strategies for ICT integration in education and workforce development and dedicatingappropriate resources. Furthermore, international cooperation would be extended, on a volun-tary basis, for capacity building in areas relevant to Internet governance. This may include, inparticular, building centres of expertise and other institutions to facilitate know-how transferand exchange of best practices, in order to enhance the participation of developing countriesand all stakeholders in Internet governance mechanisms.52.In order to ensure effective participation in global Internet governance,we urgeinternational organizations, including intergovernmental organizations, where relevant, to en-sure that all stakeholders, particularly from developing countries, have the opportunity to par-ticipate in policy decision-making relating to Internet governance, and to promote and facilitatesuch participation.53.We commit to working earnestlytowards multilingualization of the Internet, aspart of a multilateral, transparent and democratic process, involving governments and all stake-holders, in their respective roles. In this context,we also supportlocal 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.Wewould therefore underlinethe need to:a)Advance the process for the introduction of multilingualism in a number of areas includingdomain names, e-mail addresses and keyword look-up.b)Implement programmes that allow for the presence of multilingual domain names and con-tent on the Internet and the use of various software models in order to fight against the lin-guistic 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 technicalstandards and to foster their global deployment.

and private investment in the development of the Internet are critical. Value is added at theedges of the network in both developed and developing countries when the international anddomestic policy environment encourages investment and innovation.55.We recognizethat the existing arrangements for Internet governance haveworked effectively to make the Internet the highly robust, dynamic and geographically diversemedium that it is today, with the private sector taking the lead in day-to-day operations, andwith innovation and value creation at the edges.56.The Internet remains a highly dynamic medium and therefore any framework andmechanisms designed to deal with Internet governance should be inclusive and responsive tothe exponential growth and fast evolution of the Internet as a common platform for the devel-opment of multiple applications.57.The security and stability of the Internet must be maintained.58.We recognizethat Internet governance includes more than Internet naming andaddressing. It also includes other significant public policy issues such as,inter alia,critical Inter-net resources, the security and safety of the Internet, and developmental aspects and issues per-taining to the use of the Internet.59.We recognizethat Internet governance includes social, economic and technicalissues including affordability, reliability and quality of service.60.We further recognizethat there are many cross-cutting international public poli-cy issues that require attention and are not adequately addressed by the current mechanisms.61.We are convincedthat there is a need to initiate, and reinforce, as appropriate, atransparent, democratic, and multilateral process, with the participation of governments, privatesector, civil society and international organizations, in their respective roles. This process couldenvisage creation of a suitable framework or mechanisms, where justified, thus spurring the on-going and active evolution of the current arrangements in order to synergize the efforts in thisregard.62.We emphasizethat any Internet governance approach should be inclusive andresponsive and should continue to promote an enabling environment for innovation, competi-tion and investment.63.Countries should not be involved in decisions regarding another country’s coun-try-code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD). Their legitimate interests, as expressed and defined byeach 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 recognizethe need for further development of, and strengthened coopera-tion among, stakeholders for public policies for generic Top-Level Domain names (gTLDs).65.We underlinethe need to maximize the participation of developing countries indecisions regarding Internet governance, which should reflect their interests, as well as in de-velopment and capacity building.66.In view of the continuing internationalization of the Internet and the principle ofuniversality,we agreeto implement the Geneva Principles regarding Internet governance.67.We agree,inter alia,to invite the UN Secretary-General to convene a new forumfor multi-stakeholder policy dialogue.68.We recognizethat all governments should have an equal role and responsibilityfor international Internet governance and for ensuring the stability, security and continuity of

the Internet.We also recognizethe need for development of public policy by governments inconsultation with all stakeholders.69.We further recognizethe need for enhanced cooperation in the future, to enablegovernments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities, in internationalpublic policy issues pertaining to the Internet, but not in the day-to-day technical and opera-tional matters, that do not impact on international public policy issues.70.Using relevant international organizations, such cooperation should include thedevelopment of globally-applicable principles on public policy issues associated with the coor-dination and management of critical Internet resources. In this regard,we call uponthe organ-izations responsible for essential tasks associated with the Internet to contribute to creating anenvironment 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 involveall stakeholders in their respective roles, will proceed as quickly as possible consistent with legalprocess, and will be responsive to innovation. Relevant organizations should commence aprocess towards enhanced cooperation involving all stakeholders, proceeding as quickly aspossible and responsive to innovation. The same relevant organizations shall be requested toprovide annual performance reports.72.We ask the UN Secretary-General,in an open and inclusive process, to con-vene, by the second quarter of 2006, a meeting of the new forum for multi-stakeholder policydialogue—called theInternet Governance Forum(IGF). The mandate of the Forum is to:a)Discuss public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance in order tofoster the sustainability, robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet.b)Facilitate discourse between bodies dealing with different cross-cutting international publicpolicies regarding the Internet and discuss issues that do not fall within the scope of any ex-isting body.c)Interface with appropriate intergovernmental organizations and other institutions on mattersunder their purview.d)Facilitate the exchange of information and best practices, and in this regard make full use ofthe expertise of the academic, scientific and technical communities.e)Advise all stakeholders in proposing ways and means to accelerate the availability and af-fordability of the Internet in the developing world.f)Strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in existing and/or future Internetgovernance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries.

74.We encouragethe UN Secretary-General to examine a range of options for theconvening of the Forum, taking into consideration the proven competencies of all stakeholdersin Internet governance and the need to ensure their full involvement.75.The UN Secretary-General would report to UN Member States periodically on theoperation of the Forum.76.We ask the UN Secretary-Generalto examine the desirability of the continua-tion of the Forum, in formal consultation with Forum participants, within five years of its crea-tion, and to make recommendations to the UN Membership in this regard.77.The IGF would have no oversight function and would not replace existing ar-rangements, mechanisms, institutions or organizations, but would involve them and take ad-vantage of their expertise. It would be constituted as a neutral, non-duplicative and non-bindingprocess. 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 rele-vant parties to participate at the inaugural meeting of the IGF, taking into consideration ba-lanced geographical representation. The UN Secretary-General should also:a)draw upon any appropriate resources from all interested stakeholders, including theproven expertise of ITU, as demonstrated during the WSIS process; andb)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 inother relevant fora.80.We encouragethe development of multi-stakeholder processes at the national,regional and international levels to discuss and collaborate on the expansion and diffusion ofthe Internet as a means to support development efforts to achieve internationally agreed devel-opment goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.81.We reaffirm our commitmentto the full implementation of the Geneva Prin-ciples.82.We welcomethe generous offer of the Government of Greece to host the firstmeeting of the IGF in Athens no later than 2006 andwe call uponthe UN Secretary-Generalto extend invitations to all stakeholders and relevant parties to participate at the inaugural meet-ing of the IGF.

of the outcomes and commitments reached during the WSIS process and its Geneva and Tunisphases of the Summit. Taking into account the multifaceted nature of building the InformationSociety, effective cooperation among governments, private sector, civil society and the UnitedNations and other international organizations, according to their different roles and responsibil-ities and leveraging on their expertise, is essential.84.Governments and other stakeholders should identify those areas where further ef-fort and resources are required, and jointly identify, and where appropriate develop, implemen-tation strategies, mechanisms and processes for WSIS outcomes at international, regional, na-tional and local levels, paying particular attention to people and groups that are still margina-lized in their access to, and utilization of, ICTs.85.Taking into consideration the leading role of governments in partnership withother stakeholders in implementing the WSIS outcomes, including the Geneva Plan of Action,at the national level,we encouragethose governments that have not yet done so to elaborate,as appropriate, comprehensive, forward-looking and sustainable national e-strategies, includingICT strategies and sectoral e-strategies as appropriate4, as an integral part of national develop-ment plans and poverty reduction strategies, as soon as possible and before 2010.86.We supportregional and international integration efforts aimed at building apeople-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society, andwe reiteratethatstrong cooperation within and among regions is indispensable to support knowledge-sharing.Regional cooperation should contribute to national capacity building and to the development ofregional implementation strategies.87.We affirmthat the exchange of views and sharing of effective practices and re-sources is essential to implementing the outcomes of WSIS at the regional and international le-vels. To this end, efforts should be made to provide and share, among all stakeholders, know-ledge and know-how, related to the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of e-strategies and policies, as appropriate.We recognizeas fundamental elements to bridge thedigital divide in developing countries, in a sustainable way, poverty reduction, enhanced nation-al capacity building and the promotion of national technological development.88.We reaffirmthat through the international cooperation of governments and thepartnership of all stakeholders, it will be possible to succeed in our challenge of harnessing thepotential of ICTs as a tool, at the service of development, to promote the use of informationand knowledge to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, includ-ing the Millennium Development Goals, as well as to address the national and local develop-ment priorities, thereby further improving the socio- economic development of all human be-ings.89.We are determinedto improve international, regional and national connectivityand affordable access to ICTs and information through an enhanced international cooperationof all stakeholders that promotes technology exchange and technology transfer, human re-source development and training, thus increasing the capacity of developing countries to inno-vate and to participate fully in, and contribute to, the Information Society.90.We reaffirm our commitmentto providing equitable access to information andknowledge for all, recognizing the role of ICTs for economic growth and development.We arecommittedto working towards achieving the indicative targets, set out in the Geneva Plan ofThroughout this text, further references to “e-strategies” are interpreted as including also ICT strategiesand sectoral e-strategies, as appropriate.4

Action, that serve as global references for improving connectivity and universal, ubiquitous,equitable, non-discriminatory and affordable access to, and use of, ICTs, considering differentnational circumstances, to be achieved by 2015, and to using ICTs, as a tool to achieve the in-ternationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium DevelopmentGoals, by:a)mainstreaming and aligning national e-strategies,across local, national, and regional action plans, asappropriate and in accordance with local and national development priorities, with in-builttime-bound measures.b)developing and implementing enabling policiesthat reflect national realities and that promote a sup-portive international environment, foreign direct investment as well as the mobilization ofdomestic resources, in order to promote and foster entrepreneurship, particularly Small,Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), taking into account the relevant market and cul-tural contexts. These policies should be reflected in a transparent, equitable regulatoryframework to create a competitive environment to support these goals and strengthen eco-nomic growth.c)building ICT capacityfor all and confidence in the use of ICTs by all - including youth, olderpersons, women, indigenous peoples, people with disabilities, and remote and rural com-munities - through the improvement and delivery of relevant education and training pro-grammes and systems including lifelong and distance learning.d)implementing effective training and education,particularly in ICT science and technology, that mo-tivates and promotes participation and active involvement of girls and women in the deci-sion-making process of building the Information Society.e)paying special attention to the formulation of universal design concepts and the use of assistive technologiesthat promote access for all persons, including those with disabilities.f)promoting public policies aimed at providing affordable accessat all levels, including community-level,to hardware as well as software and connectivity through an increasingly converging tech-nological environment, capacity building and local content.g)improving access to the world's health knowledge and telemedicine services,in particular in areas such asglobal cooperation in emergency response, access to and networking among health profes-sionals to help improve quality of life and environmental conditions.h)building ICT capacitiesto improve access and use of postal networks and services.i)using ICTs to improve access to agricultural knowledge,combat poverty, and support production ofand access to locally relevant agriculture-related content.j)developing and implementing e-government applicationsbased on open standards in order to enhancethe growth and interoperability of e-government systems, at all levels, thereby furtheringaccess to government information and services, and contributing to building ICT networksand developing services that are available anywhere and anytime, to anyone and on any de-vice.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 preserv-ing diverse and varied content, including in digital form, to support informal and formaleducation, 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 li-teracy and community connectivity, particularly in underserved communities.

l)enhancing the capacity of communitiesin all regions to develop content in local and/or indigenouslanguages.m)strengthening the creation of quality e-content,on national, regional and international levels.n)promoting the use of traditional and new mediain order to foster universal access to information,culture and knowledge for all people, especially vulnerable populations and populations indeveloping countries and using,inter alia,radio and television as educational and learningtools.o)reaffirming the independence, pluralism and diversity of media, and freedom of informationincludingthrough, as appropriate, the development of domestic legislation,we reiterateour call forthe responsible use and treatment of information by the media in accordance with thehighest ethical and professional standards.We reaffirmthe necessity of reducing interna-tional imbalances affecting the media, particularly as regards infrastructure, technical re-sources and the development of human skills. These reaffirmations are made with refer-ence to Geneva Declaration of Principles paragraphs 55 to 59.p)strongly encouraging ICT enterprises and entrepreneurs to develop and use environment-friendly productionprocessesin order to minimize the negative impacts of the use and manufacture of ICTs anddisposal of ICT waste on people and the environment. In this context, it is important togive particular attention to the specific needs of the developing countries.q)incorporating regulatory, self-regulatory, and other effective policies and frameworks to protect children andyoung peoplefrom 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 le-vels, in order to improve collaboration in science, technology and higher education.s)promoting voluntary service,at the community level, to help maximize the developmental impactof ICTs.t)promoting the use of ICTs to enhance flexible ways of working,including teleworking, leading togreater productivity and job creation.91.We recognizethe intrinsic relationship between disaster reduction, sustainabledevelopment and the eradication of poverty and that disasters seriously undermine investmentin a very short time and remain a major impediment to sustainable development and povertyeradication.We are clearas to the important enabling role of ICTs at the national, regional andinternational levels including:a)Promoting technical cooperation and enhancing the capacity of countries, particularlydeveloping countries, in utilizing ICT tools for disaster early-warning, management andemergency communications, including dissemination of understandable warnings tothose at risk.b)Promoting regional and international cooperation for easy access to and sharing of in-formation for disaster management, and exploring modalities for the easier participationof developing countries.c)Working expeditiously towards the establishment of standards-based monitoring andworldwide early-warning systems linked to national and regional networks and facilitat-ing emergency disaster response all over the world, particularly in high-risk regions.92.We encourage countries, and all other interested parties, to make availablechild 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 bemade available.93.We seek todigitize our historical data and cultural heritage for the benefit of fu-ture generations.We encourageeffective information management policies in the public andprivate sectors, including the use of standards-based digital archiving and innovative solutionsto overcome technological obsolescence, as a means to ensure the long-term preservation of,and continued access to, information.94.We acknowledgethat everyone should benefit from the potential that the Infor-mation Society offers. Therefore,we invitegovernments to assist, on a voluntary basis, thosecountries affected by any unilateral measure not in accordance with international law and theCharter of the United Nations that impedes the full achievement of economic and social devel-opment by the population of the affected countries, and that hinders the well-being of theirpopulation.95.We call uponinternational and intergovernmental organizations to develop, with-in approved resources, their policy analysis and capacity-building programmes, based on prac-tical and replicable experiences of ICT matters, policies and actions that have led to economicgrowth and poverty alleviation, including through the improved competitiveness of enterprises.96.We recallthe importance of creating a trustworthy, transparent and non-discriminatory legal, regulatory and policy environment. To that end,we reiteratethat ITU andother 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 inter-national agreements.97.We acknowledgethat multi-stakeholder participation is essential to the successfulbuilding of a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society and thatgovernments could play an important role in this process.We underlinethat the participationof all stakeholders in implementing WSIS outcomes, and following them up on national, re-gional and international levels with the overarching goal of helping countries to achieve interna-tionally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium DevelopmentGoals, is key to that success.98.We encouragestrengthened and continuing cooperation between and amongstakeholders to ensure effective implementation of the Geneva and Tunis outcomes, for in-stance through the promotion of national, regional and international multi-stakeholder partner-ships including Public Private Partnerships (PPPs), and the promotion of national and regionalmulti-stakeholder thematic platforms, in a joint effort and dialogue with developing and lessdeveloped countries, development partners and actors in the ICT sector. In that respect,wewelcomepartnerships such as the ITU-led “Connect the World” initiative.99.We agreeto ensure the sustainability of progress towards the goals of WSIS afterthe completion of its Tunis phase andwe decide,therefore, to establish a mechanism for im-plementation and follow-up at national, regional and international levels.100.At the national level, based on the WSIS outcomes,we encouragegovernments,with the participation of all stakeholders and bearing in mind the importance of an enablingenvironment, to set up a nationalimplementationmechanism, in which:a)National e-strategies, where appropriate, should be an integral part of national develop-ment plans, including Poverty Reduction Strategies, aiming to contribute to the

achievement of internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including theMillennium Development Goals.b)ICTs should be fully mainstreamed into strategies for Official Development Assistance(ODA) through more effective information-sharing and coordination among develop-ment partners, and through analysis and sharing of best practices and lessons learnedfrom experience with ICT for development programmes.c)Existing bilateral and multilateral technical assistance programmes, including those un-der the UN Development Assistance Framework, should be used whenever appropriateto assist governments in their implementation efforts at the national level.d)Common Country Assessment reports should contain a component on ICT for devel-opment.101.At the regional level:a)Upon request from governments, regional intergovernmental organizations in collabora-tion with other stakeholders should carry out WSIS implementation activities, exchang-ing information and best practices at the regional level, as well as facilitating policy de-bate on the use of ICT for development, with a focus on attaining the internationallyagreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.b)UN Regional Commissions, based on request of Member States and within approvedbudgetary resources, may organize regional WSIS follow-up activities in collaborationwith regional and sub-regional organizations, with appropriate frequency, as well as as-sisting Member States with technical and relevant information for the development ofregional strategies and the implementation of the outcomes of regional conferences.c) We considera multi-stakeholder approach and the participation in regional WSIS im-plementation activities by the private sector, civil society, and the United Nations andother international organizations to be essential.102.At the international level, bearing in mind the importance of the enablingenvironment:

Implementation and follow-upof the outcomes of the Geneva and Tunis phases of theSummit should take into account the main themes and action lines in the Summitdocuments.b)Each UN agency should act according to its mandate and competencies, and pursuantto decisions of their respective governing bodies, and within existing approved re-sources.c)Implementation and follow-up should include intergovernmental and multi-stakeholder components.103.We inviteUN agencies and other intergovernmental organizations, in line withUNGA Resolution 57/270 B, to facilitate activities among different stakeholders, including civilsociety and the business sector, to help national governments in their implementation efforts.We requestthe UN Secretary-General, in consultation with members of the UN system ChiefExecutives Board for coordination (CEB), to establish, within the CEB, a UN Group on theInformation Society consisting of the relevant UN bodies and organizations, with the mandateto facilitate the implementation of WSIS outcomes, and to suggest to CEB that, in consideringlead agency(ies) of this Group, it takes into consideration the experience of, and activities in theWSIS process undertaken by, ITU, UNESCO and UNDP.

104.We further requestthe UN Secretary-General to report to the UNGA throughECOSOC by June 2006, on the modalities of the inter-agency coordination of the implementa-tion of WSIS outcomes including recommendations on the follow-up process.105.We requestthat ECOSOC oversees the system-wide follow-up of the Genevaand Tunis outcomes of WSIS. To this end,we requestthat ECOSOC, at its substantive ses-sion of 2006, reviews the mandate, agenda and composition of the Commission on Science andTechnology for Development (CSTD), including considering the strengthening of the Com-mission, taking into account the multi-stakeholder approach.106.WSIS implementation and follow-up should be an integral part of the UN inte-grated follow-up to major UN conferences and should contribute to the achievement of inter-nationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium DevelopmentGoals. It should not require the creation of any new operational bodies.107.International and regional organizations should assess and report regularly on uni-versal accessibility of nations to ICTs, with the aim of creating equitable opportunities for thegrowth of ICT sectors of developing countries.108.We attach great importanceto multi-stakeholder implementation at the interna-tional level, which should be organized taking into account the themes and action lines in theGeneva Plan of Action, and moderated or facilitated by UN agencies when appropriate. AnAnnex to this document offers an indicative and non-exhaustive list of facilitators/moderatorsfor the action lines of the Geneva Plan of Action.109.The experience of, and the activities undertaken by, UN agencies in the WSISprocess—notably ITU, UNESCO and UNDP—should continue to be used to their fullest ex-tent. These three agencies should play leading facilitating roles in the implementation of theGeneva Plan of Action and organize a meeting of moderators/facilitators of action lines, asmentioned in the Annex.110.The coordination of multi-stakeholder implementation activities would help toavoid duplication of activities. This should include,inter alia,information exchange, creation ofknowledge, sharing of best practices, and assistance in developing multi-stakeholder and public-private partnerships.111.We requestthe United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to make an overallreview of the implementation of WSIS outcomes in 2015.112.We call forperiodic evaluation, using an agreed methodology, such as describedinparagraphs 113-120.113.Appropriate indicators and benchmarking, including community connectivity indi-cators, should clarify the magnitude of the digital divide, in both its domestic and internationaldimensions, and keep it under regular assessment, and track global progress in the use of ICTsto achieve internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the MillenniumDevelopment Goals.114.The development of ICT indicators is important for measuring the digital divide.We notethe launch, in June 2004, of thePartnership on Measuring ICT for Development,and its ef-forts:a)to develop a common set of core ICT indicators; to increase the availability of interna-tionally comparable ICT statistics as well as to establish a mutually agreed framework

for their elaboration, for further consideration and decision by the UN StatisticalCommission.b)to promote capacity building in developing countries for monitoring the InformationSociety.c)to assess the current and potential impact of ICTs on development and poverty reduc-tion.d)to develop specific gender-disaggregated indicators to measure the digital divide in itsvarious dimensions.115.We also notethe launch of theICT Opportunity Indexand theDigital Opportunity In-dex,which will build upon the common set of core ICT indicators as they were defined withinthePartnership on Measuring ICT for Development.116.We stressthat all indices and indicators must take into account different levels ofdevelopment and national circumstances.117.The further development of these indicators should be undertaken in a collabora-tive, cost-effective and non-duplicative fashion.118.We invitethe international community to strengthen the statistical capacity ofdeveloping countries by giving appropriate support at national and regional levels.119.We commitourselves to review and follow up progress in bridging the digital di-vide, taking into account the different levels of development among nations, so as to achievethe internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Devel-opment Goals, assessing the effectiveness of investment and international cooperation effortsin building the Information Society, identifying gaps as well as deficits in investment and devis-ing strategies to address them.120.The sharing of information related to the implementation of WSIS outcomes is animportant element of evaluation.We note with appreciationtheReport on the Stocktaking ofWSIS-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 “GoldenBook”of in-itiatives launched during the Tunis phase.We encourageall WSIS stakeholders to continue tocontribute information on their activities to the public WSIS stocktaking database maintainedby ITU. In this regard,we inviteall countries to gather information at the national level withthe 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 glob-al facility which is truly available to the public.We call upon the UNGAto declare 17 May asWorld Information Society Day to help to raise awareness, on an annual basis, of the impor-tance of this global facility, on the issues dealt with in the Summit, especially the possibilitiesthat the use of ICT can bring for societies and economies, as well as of ways to bridge the digi-tal divide.122.We requestthe Secretary-General of the Summit to report to the General As-sembly of the United Nations on its outcome, as requested in UNGA Resolution 59/220.

President Ben Ali,Excellencies,Ladies and Gentlemen,I commend our hosts – President Ben Ali and the Government and people of Tu-nisia -- for all they have done to make this gathering possible. Let us remember that it was theGovernment of Tunisia, back in 1998, that first proposed the idea of a summit on the informa-tion society.I also thank the International Telecommunication Union and other members ofthe UN family for their unremitting efforts to ensure that this process produces concrete re-sults.Two years ago in Geneva, the first phase of the World Summit articulated a visionof an open and inclusive information society. Our task here in Tunis is to move from diagnosisto 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 outcomeof the World Summit held two months ago at the United Nations in New York. It must leadto information and communications technologies being used in new ways, which will bring newbenefits to all social classes. Most of all, it must generate new momentum towards developingthe 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 humancapacity is expanded, built up, nourished and liberated, by giving people access to the tools andtechnologies they need, with the education and training to use them effectively. The hurdlehere is more political than financial. The costs of connectivity, computers and mobile tele-phones can be brought down. These assets -- these bridges to a better life -- can be made uni-versally 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 sec-tor, civil society and international organizations.And of course, the information society’s very life blood is freedom. It is freedomthat enables citizens everywhere to benefit from knowledge, journalists to do their essentialwork, and citizens to hold government accountable. Without openness, without the right toseek, 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 still-born.The time has come to move beyond broad discussions of the digital divide. Bynow, we know what the problems are. We must now get down to the specifics of implementa-tion, and set out ways to foster and expand digital opportunities.Those opportunities are immense. Already, in Africa and other developing regions, therapid spread of mobile telephones and wireless telecommunication has spurred entrepreneur-ship, and helped small businesses take root, particularly those run and owned by women. Doc-tors in remote areas have gained access to medical information on tropical diseases. Studentshave been able to tap into world-wide databases of books and research. Early warning of natu-ral disasters has improved, and relief workers have been able to provide quicker, better coordi-nated relief. The same opportunities – and other, new ones – can be given to many more peo-ple in the developing world.The UN system is ready to help member states and all stakeholders to implement what-ever decisions are taken at this Summit, including on Internet governance. But let me be abso-lutely clear: The United Nations does not want to “take over”, police or otherwise control theInternet. The United Nations consists of you, its Member States. It can want only what youagree on. And as I understand it, what we are all striving for is to protect and strengthen theInternet, and to ensure that its benefits are available to all.The United States deserves our thanks for having developed the Internet and making itavailable to the world. It has exercised its oversight responsibilities fairly and honourably. I be-lieve all of you agree that day-to-day management of the Internet must be left to technical insti-tutions, not least to shield it from the heat of day-to-day politics. But I think you also all ac-knowledge the need for more international participation in discussions of Internet governanceissues. 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 Nationswill support this process in every way we can.Mr. President,The experiences of recent years – in this Summit process, the ICT Task Force, theWorking Group on Internet Governance, the Digital Solidarity Fund, UNFIP -- the UN Officefor International Partnerships, the Global Compact corporate citizenship initiative and other

SECOND PHASE OF WSIS, 16-18 NOVEMBER, TUNISSTATEMENT FROM UNITED KINGDOMTHE RIGHT HONOURABLE ALUN MICHAEL, MINISTER OF STATEFOR INDUSTRY AND REGIONS16 November 2005Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,On behalf of the European Union and the two acceding countries, Romania and Bul-garia,I would like to congratulate the President of the Preparatory Committee andall Member States on successfully concluding negotiations last night, on what has nowbecome the "Tunis Agenda for the Information Society".The European Union warmly welcomes this achievement. We recognise the Tunis Agenda as an im-portant contribution towards what needs to be a truly global effort to bridge the digital divide: to ensurethat the benefits of information communication technologies (ICTs) can be enjoyed by all. Welook forward to working with all stakeholders to ensure the full and effective implementationof both stages of the WSIS process so that this truly becomes, as the United Nations Secretary Generalexhorted 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 aidbudget by 2010. A growing proportion goes to developing country governments directly tosupport their own development plans and budgets, and they choose how much to allocate toICT. Its importance is shown by the major role ICT is playing in the fight against HIV and Aidsthrough 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 WorldSummit on the Information Society have all highlighted the important role that ICTs play indevelopment.The economic and social benefits are far-reaching –connecting schools to the Internet; ena-bling remote rural communities to get urgent medical advice; giving farmers access to mar-ket price information. Mobile phones are now being used in developing countries to transfercash virtually, bringing micro-credit and banking services to previously excluded poorer commu-nities.ICT can enable people to participate more effectively in political processes. Thus ICT is an essentialcomponent of the participation, transparency, and good governance that are increasingly seen (for in-stance 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 indus-try, place the right conditions to encourage wider access to ICTs and foster further innovation and so-cial and economic development.A good example is Bangladesh, where the Administration — in an effort to quickly expandlocal access to communications — partially deregulated the VSAT/satellite sector, achievingan eight-fold increase in connectivity as a result.In Africa, through their Regional ICT Infrastructure Programme the African Union andNEPAD aim to complete an optic fibre link around Africa and establish connections be-tween all African countries, and to the rest of the world. It shows what can be achieved ifgovernments, the development community and the private sector work together. The EU will play itspart under the new Infrastructure Partnership with Africa.Our experience in the UK suggests that there are three basic principles for governments to follow:oFirst,to avoid regulation that limits innovation.This is important when we dealwith issues such as the future framework for audiovisual content and Voice overInternet Protocol.oSecond, regulation should deliver market stability and certainty which will attract in-vestment based on open and competitive markets.oThird governments should work in partnership with industry and consumers to find,wherever possible, non-legislative solutions to deal effectively with public policyconcerns. Take the example of an issue that is important to all of us: protecting children. Inmy country we have developed a solution that is much speedier and more effective than legis-lation can ever be. Industry and Government agreed that industry itself would set up a clearinghouse, called the Internet Watch Foundation to detect abusive images of children on the Inter-net. Industry agreed to work with the Foundation to remove those sites. Government agreed tohold back from legislation. Together we have achieved more through co-operation in a yearthan legislation could achieve in five years, and at minimum cost.

Information and communication technology – ICT – is the most powerful and efficient enablerin 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 qual-ity 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 our-selves with the Millennium Declaration five years ago.The World Summit on the Information Society is of vital importance if we want to spread thesepositive 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 rolein the development of the Internet – to the benefit of citizens, businesses and governmentsalike.We therefore have to find a way to ensure true legitimacy to the governance system withoutjeopardising further development of the Internet.

A governance system at the international level, which cannot introduce any form of contentcontrol! 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 stoneof the Information Society. Countries, which do not understand this, will in the long run loosein 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, toensure 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 maximumbenefits of globalisation.The challenge is to adapt the economy to rapid changes, to be part of the new international di-vision of labour with products of high quality and to ensure that benefits are spread out to allgroups in society.The Danish Government has for many years acknowledged that the future of the Danish soci-ety depends on the ability to create and use knowledge and technology. We aim to strengthenthe emphasis on research, education, innovation and entrepreneurship.We already know that the use of ICT by enterprises, public institutions and private householdshas an enormous impact.And the area is constantly being developed for the purpose of promoting overall growth in thebusiness sector, ensuring sustainable development, obtaining service improvements and creat-ing 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 acrossall sectors of society. And in view of the technological development, security issues are in focusmore than ever.Ladies and gentlemen,We are looking forward to the outcome of the processes that will follow from this Summit. Re-sults that should lead to a prosperous and successful roll-out of the Information Society and tothe benefit of all in the Global Community.

I. Introduction – Our Perspective After the WSIS ProcessThe WSIS was an opportunity for a wide range of actors to work together to develop principlesand prioritise actions that would lead to democratic, inclusive, participatory and development-oriented information societies at the local, national and international levels; societies in whichthe ability to access, share and communicate information and knowledge is treated as a publicgood 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 accessto information and communication tools, capacities and infrastructure that exist betweencountries, and in many cases within countries and that will enable opportunities for effec-tive ICT uses.Agreement on a substantively broad and procedurally inclusive approach to Internet gover-nance, the reform of existing governance mechanisms in accordance with the Geneva prin-ciples, 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 globalcommitment to human rights, social justice and inclusive and sustainable development, ispresent 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 ofCivil Society would become more comprehensive and integrated at local, national, regionaland global levels of governance and decision making.Agreement on strong commitment to the centrality of human rights, especially the right toaccess and impart information and to individual privacy.

Civil Society affirms that, facing very limited resources, it has contributed positively to theWSIS process, a contribution that could have been even greater had the opportunity beenmade available for an even more comprehensive participation on our part. Our contribution willcontinue beyond the Summit. It is a contribution that is made both through constructive en-gagement and through challenge and critique.While we value the process and the outcomes, we are convinced much more could have beenachieved. We have taken a month after the closure of the Tunis Summit to discuss the out-comes and the process of WSIS. We built on our Geneva 2003 Civil Society Summit Declara-tion “Shaping Information Societies for Human Needs”, and we evaluated the experiences andlessons learned in the four years of WSIS I and WSIS II. This statement was developed in aglobal online consultation process. It is presented as Civil Society’s official contribution to theSummit outcomes.The issues of greatest concern to Civil Society are addressed in sections II and III of thisstatement. For most of these items, minor achievements in the outcomes from WSIS were off-set by major shortcomings, with much remaining to be done. Some of our greatest concernsinvolve what we consider to be insufficient attention or inadequate recommendations concern-ing people-centred issues such as the degree of attention paid to human rights and freedom ofexpression, the financial mechanisms for the promotion of development that was the originalimpetus for the WSIS process, and support for capacity building. In section IV, we lay out thefirst building blocks of Civil Society’s “Tunis Commitment”. Civil Society has every intention toremain involved in the follow-up and implementation processes after the Tunis summit. Wetrust governments realize that our participation is vital to achieve a more inclusive and just In-formation Society.

II. Issues Addressed During the Tunis Phase of WSISSocial Justice, Financing and People-Centred DevelopmentThe broad mandate for WSIS was to address the long-standing issues in economic and socialdevelopment from the newly emerging perspectives of the opportunities and risks posed by therevolution in Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs). The summit was expectedto identify and articulate new development possibilities and paradigms being made possible inthe Information Society, and to evolve public policy options for enabling and realising theseopportunities. Overall, it is impossible not to conclude that WSIS has failed to live up to theseexpectations. 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 Devel-opment (ICTD), it failed to recognize that ICTD presents a challenge beyond that of traditionaldevelopment financing. Nor did the Tunis fully comprehend that new means and sources of fi-nancing and the exploration of new models and mechanisms are required.Investments in ICTD - in infrastructure, capacity building, appropriate software and hardwareand in developing applications and services – underpin all other processes of development in-novation, learning and sharing, and should be seen in this light. Though development re-sources are admittedly scarce and have to be allocated with care and discretion, ICTD financ-ing should not be viewed as directly in competition with the financing of other developmentalsectors. Financing ICTD should be considered a priority at both national and international le-vels, with specific approaches to each country according to its level of development and with along-term perspective adapted to a global vision of development and sharing within the globalcommunity.Financing ICTD requires social and institutional innovation, with adequate mechanisms fortransparency, evaluation, and follow-up. Financial resources need to be mobilised at all levels– local, national and international, including through the realization of ODA commitmentsagreed to in the Monterrey Consensus and including assistance to programs and activitieswhose short-term sustainability cannot be immediately demonstrated because of the low levelof resources available as their starting point.Internet access, for everybody and everywhere, especially among disadvantaged populationsand in rural areas, must be considered as a global public good. In many cases market ap-proaches are unlikely to address the connectivity needs of particularly disadvantaged regionsand populations. In many such areas, initial priority may need to be given to the provision ofmore traditional ICTs - radio, TV, video and telephony - while the conditions are developed forensuring the availability of complete Internet connectivity. Info-structure and development of-ten require attention to the development of more traditional infrastructure as well such asroads and electricity.While the summit in general has failed to agree on adequate funding for ICTD, Civil Societywas able to introduce significant sections in the Tunis Commitment (paragraph 35) and in theTunis Agenda (paragraph 21) on the importance of public policy in mobilizing resources for fi-nancing. This can serve as a balance to the market-based orientation of much of the text onfinancing.The potential of ICT as tools for development, and not merely tools for communication, by nowshould have been realised by all states. National ICT strategies should be closely related to na-tional strategies for development and poverty eradication. Aid strategies in developed coun-tries should include clear guidelines for the incorporation of ICT into all aspects of develop-ment. 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 ofdevelopment assistance.We welcome the launch of the Digital Solidarity Fund (DSF) in March 2005 and take note of thesupport it got both from the United Nations and the Tunis Summit. Nevertheless, taking intoaccount that the DSF was established on a voluntarily basis, we are concerned that there areno clear commitments from governments and the private sector to provide the needed materi-al support to ensure the success of this fund. We invite all partners from the governmental andthe private sector to commit themselves to the so-called "Geneva Principle" where each ICTcontract concluded by a public administration with a private company includes a one percentcontribution to the DSF. We particularly encourage local and regional administrations to adoptthis principle and welcome the relevant statement made by the World Summit of Cities and Lo-cal Authorities in Bilbao, November 2005, on the eve of WSIS II.

Human RightsThe Information Society must be based on human rights as laid out in the Universal Declara-tion of Human Rights. This includes civil and political rights, as well as social, economic andcultural rights. Human rights and development are closely linked. There can be no develop-ment without human rights, no human rights without development.This has been affirmed time and again, and was strongly stated in the Vienna World Confe-rence on Human Rights in 1993. It was also affirmed in the WSIS 2003 Declaration of Prin-ciples. All legislation, policies, and actions involved in developing the global Information Socie-ty 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 isstill a long way to go. A number of human rights were barely addressed in the Geneva Declara-tion of Principles. This includes the cross-cutting principles of non-discrimination, genderequality, and workers’ rights. The right to privacy, which is the basis of autonomous personaldevelopment and thus at the root of the exertion of many other fundamental human rights, isonly mentioned in the Geneva Declaration as part of "a global culture of cyber-security". In theTunis Commitment, it has disappeared, to make room for extensive underlining of securityneeds, as if privacy were a threat to security, whereas the opposite is true: privacy is an es-sential requirement for security. The summit has also ignored our demand that the principle ofthe privacy and integrity of the vote be ensured if and when electronic voting technologies areused.Other rights were more explicitly addressed, but are de facto violated on a daily basis. Thisgoes 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 forthe 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, im-plementation is something else. Side events open to the general public were organised by civilsociety both at the Geneva and Tunis Summit, consistent with a long tradition in the context ofUN summits. In Tunis, the initiative by parts of civil society to organize a "Citizens' Summit onthe Information Society" was prevented from happening. At the Geneva Summit, the "We Se-ize" event was closed down and then reopened. This is a clear reminder that though govern-ments have signed on to human rights commitments, fundamental human rights such as free-dom of expression and freedom of assembly can not be taken for granted in any part of theworld.The summit has failed to define mechanisms and actions that would actively promote and pro-tect human rights in the Information Society. Post-WSIS there is an urgent need to strengthenthe means of human rights enforcement, to ensure the embedding of human rights proofing in

Internet GovernanceCivil Society is pleased with the decision to create an Internet Governance Forum (IGF), whichit has advocated for since 2003. We also are pleased that the IGF will have sufficient scope todeal with the issues we believe must be addressed, most notably the conformity of existing ar-rangements with the Geneva Principles, and other cross-cutting or multidimensional issuesthat cannot be optimally dealt with within current arrangements. However, we reiterate ourconcerns that the Forum must not be anchored in any existing specialized international organi-zation, meaning that its legal form, finances, and professional staff should be independent. Inaddition, we reiterate our view that the forum should be more than a place for dialogue. Aswas recommended by the WGIG Report, it should also provide expert analysis, trend monitor-ing, and capacity building, including in close collaboration with external partners in the re-search community.We are concerned about the absence of details on how this forum will be created and on how itwill be funded. We insist that the modalities of the IGF be determined in full cooperation withCivil Society. We emphasize that success in the forum, as in most areas of Internet gover-nance, will be impossible without the full participation of Civil Society. By full participation wemean much more than playing a mere advisory role. Civil Society must be able to participatefully and equally both in plenary and any working or drafting group discussions, and must havethe same opportunities as other stakeholders to influence agendas and outcomes.The Tunis Agenda addressed the issue of political oversight of critical Internet resources in itsparagraphs 69 to 71. This, in itself, is an achievement. It is also important that governmentsrecognized the need for the development of a set of Internet-related public policy principlesthat would frame political oversight of Internet resources. These principles must respect, pro-tect and promote human rights as laid down in international human rights treaties, ensureequitable access to information and online opportunities for all, and promote development.It is important that governments have established that developing these principles should be ashared responsibility. However, it is very unfortunate that the Tunis Agenda suggests thatgovernments are only willing to share this role and responsibility among themselves, in coop-eration with international organisations. Civil Society remains strongly of the view that theformulation of appropriate and legitimate public policies pertaining to Internet governance re-quires 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 men-tion that efforts to combat cyber-crime need to be exercised in the context of checks and bal-ances 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 apublic good both for people of the concerned country or economy and for global citizens whohave various linkages to particular countries. While we recognize the important role of gov-ernments in protecting the ccTLDs that refer to their countries or economies, this role must beexecuted in a manner that respects human rights as expressed in existing international trea-ties through a democratic, transparent and inclusive process with full involvement of all stake-holders.

To ensure that development of the Internet and its governance takes place in the public inter-est, it is important for all stakeholders to better understand how core Internet governancefunctions – as for example, DNS management, IP address allocation, and others – are carriedout. It is equally important that these same actors understand the linkages between broaderInternet governance and Internet related matters such as cyber-crime, Intellectual PropertyRights, e-commerce, e-government, human rights and capacity building and economic devel-opment. The responsibility of creating such awareness should be shared by everyone, includingthose at present involved in the governance and development of the Internet and emerging in-formation and communication platforms. Equally it is essential that as this awareness developsin newer users of the Internet, older users must be open to the new perspectives that willemerge.

Global governanceA world that is increasingly more connected faces a considerable and growing number of com-mon issues which need to be addressed by global governance institutions and processes. WhileCivil Society recognises that there are flaws and inefficiencies in the United Nations systemthat 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 fromdeveloped countries, lack faith in, and appear to be unwilling to invest authority and resourcesin the present multilateral system, along with concerted efforts to further improve it. We alsoregret that debates on creating private-public partnerships and new para-institutions withinthe 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 underpinglobal public policy and governance structures; to address critical issues, and to decide on ap-propriate responses to these issues. Shrinking global public policy spaces raise serious ques-tions concerning the kind of global governance toward which we are heading, and what thismight mean for people who are socially, economically and politically marginalised: preciselythose people who most rely on public policy to protect their interests.

ParticipationIn the course of four years, as a result of constant pressure from Civil Society, improvementsin Civil Society participation in these processes have been achieved, including speaking rightsin 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 govern-mental and Civil Society actors worked on an equal footing and Civil Society actually carried alarge part of the drafting load.Due to the pressure of time and the need of governments to interact with Civil Society actorsin the Internet Governance field, the resumed session of PrepCom3 was in fact the most openof all. We would like to underline that this openness, against all odds, contributed to reachingconsensus.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 do-cumented to provide a reference point and a benchmark for participants in UN organizationsand processes in the future.Civil Society thanks those governments and international bodies that greatly supported ourparticipation in the WSIS process. We hope and expect that these achievements are taken fur-

ther and strengthened, especially in more politically contested spaces of global policymakingsuch as those concerning intellectual property rights, trade, environment, and peace and dis-armament.We note that some governments from developing countries were not actively supportive ofgreater observer participation believing that that it can lead to undue dominance of debate andopinions by international and developed countries’ Civil Society organisations and the privatesector. We believe that to change this perception, efforts should be engaged in to strengthenthe presence, independence and participation of Civil Society constituencies in and from theirown 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 andfollow-up (including the revision of the mandate of the ECOSOC Commission on Science andTechnology 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. Inalmost every paragraph talking about multi-stakeholder participation, the phrase “in their re-spective roles and responsibilities” is used to limit the degree of multi-stakeholder participa-tion. This limitation is due to the refusal of governments to recognize the full range of the rolesand responsibilities of Civil Society. Instead of the reduced capabilities assigned in paragraph35C of the Tunis Agenda that attempt to restrict Civil Society to a community role, govern-ments should have at minima referred to the list of Civil Society roles and responsibilities listedin 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 andgrassroots activists;Engage in policy processes;Bring expertise, skills, experience and knowledge in a range of ICT policy areas contribut-ing 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 mem-bers 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 humanrights, sustainable development, social justice and empowerment.

Civil Society has reason for concern that the limited concessions obtained in the last few daysbefore 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 intendto remain actively mobilized. They need to proactively ensure that not only the needed futurestructures be established in a truly multi-stakeholder format, but also that the discussions pre-paring their mandates are conducted in an open, transparent and inclusive manner, allowingparticipation of all stakeholders on an equal footing. Civil Society hopes to be given the meansto ensure all its representatives from different regions, languages and cultures, from devel-oped and developing countries, can fully participate.

III. Issues Addressed in the Geneva and Tunis PhasesGender EqualityEqual and active participation of women is essential, especially in decision-making. This in-cludes 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 withthe shaping of an Information Society at all levels, including policy making on infrastructuredevelopment, financing, and technology choice.There is a need for real effort and commitment to transforming the masculinist culture embed-ded within existing structures and discourses of the Information Society which serves to rein-force gender disparity and inequality. Without full, material and engaged commitment to theprinciple of gender equality, women’s empowerment and non-discrimination, the vision of ajust and equitable Information Society cannot be achieved.Considering the affirmation of unequivocal support for gender equality and women’s empo-werment expressed in the Geneva Declaration of Principles and paying careful attention to Pa-ragraph 23 of the Tunis Commitment, all government signatories must ensure that nationalpolicies, programmes and strategies developed and implemented to build a people-centred, in-clusive and development-oriented Information Society demonstrate significant commitment tothe principles of gender equality and women’s empowerment.We emphasise that financial structures and mechanisms need to be geared towards addressingthe gender divide, including the provision of adequate budgetary allocations. Comprehensivegender-disaggregated data and indicators have to be developed at national levels to enableand monitor this process. We urge all governments to take positive action to ensure that insti-tutions and practices, including those of the private sector, do not result in discriminationagainst women. Governments that are parties to the UN Convention on the Elimination of AllForms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) are in fact bound to this course of action.

Culture, Knowledge, and the Public DomainEach generation of humankind is depending upon its predecessors to leave them with a livea-ble, sustainable and stable environment. The environment we were discussing throughout theWSIS is the public domain of global knowledge. Like our planet with its natural resources, thatdomain is the heritage of all humankind and the reservoir from which new knowledge iscreated. Limited monopolies, such as copyrights and patents were originally conceived as toolsto serve that public domain of global knowledge to the benefit of humankind. Whenever socie-ty grants monopolies, a delicate balance must be struck: Careless monopolization will makeour 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 toinstantaneously share knowledge in real-time, without loss, and at almost no cost. Civil Societyhas 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 mostimportant regulator of the digital age. Access to it determines who may participate in a digitalworld. While in the Geneva phase, WSIS has recognised the importance of Free Software, ithas not acted upon that declaration and this recognition faded in the Tunis phase. In the TunisCommitment, Free Software is presented as a software model next to proprietary software, butparagraph 29 reiterates “the importance of proprietary software in the markets of the coun-tries.” This ignores that a proprietary software market is always striving towards dependencyand 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. Further-

more: Proprietary software is often written in modern sweat-shops for the benefit of developedeconomies, which are subsidized at the expense of developing and least-developed countries inthis way.While WSIS has somewhat recognised the importance of free and open source software, it hasnot asserted the significance of this choice for development. It is silent on other issues likeopen content (which goes beyond open access in the area of academic publications), new opentelecom paradigms and community-owned infrastructure as important development enablers.The WSIS process has failed to introduce cultural and linguistic diversity as a cross-cutting is-sue in the Information Society. The Information Society and its core elements - knowledge, in-formation, communication and the information and communication technologies (ICT) togetherwith related rules and standards - are cultural concepts and expressions. Accordingly, cultural-ly defined approaches, protocols, proceedings and obligations have to be respected and cultu-rally appropriate applications developed and promoted. In order to foster and promote culturaldiversity it must be ensured that no one has to be a mere recipient of Western knowledge andtreatment. Therefore development of the cultural elements of the Information Society must in-volve strong participation by all cultural communities. The WSIS has failed to recognize theneed for developing knowledge resources to shift the current lack of diversity, to move fromthe dominant paradigm of over-developed nations and cultures to the need for being open tolearning and seeing differently.Indigenous Peoples, further to self-determination and pursuant to their traditional and custo-mary laws, protocols, rules and regulations, oral and written, provide for the access, use, ap-plication and dissemination of traditional and cultural knowledge, oral histories, folklore and re-lated customs and practices. WSIS has failed to protect these from exploitation, misuse andappropriation by third parties. As a result, the traditional knowledge, oral histories, folkloreand related customs, practices and representations have been and continue to be exploited byboth informal and formal (being copyright, trademark and patent) means, with no benefits tothe rightful Indigenous holders of that knowledge.

Education, Research, and PracticeIf we want future generations to understand the real basis of our digital age, freedom has tobe preserved for the knowledge of humankind: Free Software, open courseware and free edu-cational 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 ac-tive participants and well informed citizens in the Information Society. Each generation has achoice to make: Schooling of the mind and creativity, or product schooling? Most unfortunate-ly, the WSIS has shown a significant tendency towards the latter.We are happy that universities, museums, archives, libraries have been recognized by WSIS asplaying an important role as public institutions and with the community of researchers andacademics. Unfortunately, telecenters are missing in the WSIS documents. Community infor-matics, 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 trainingserves ICT. Thus special attention must be paid to supporting sustainable capacity buildingwith a specific focus on research and skills development. In order to tackle development con-texts training should have a sociological focus too and not be entirely technologically framed.Problems of access, regulation, diversity and efficiency require attention to power relationsboth in the field of ICT policy-making and in the everyday uses of ICT. Academic researchshould play a pivotal role in evaluating whether ICT meets and serves the individuals’ and thepublic's multiple needs and interests - as workers, women, migrants, racial, ethnic and sexualminorities, 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 publicin the technological design of ICT. Similarly, educators at all levels should be empowered todevelop curricula that provide or contribute to training for people not only as workers and con-sumers using ICT, but also in the basic science and engineering of ICT, in the participatory de-sign of ICT by communities with computing professionals, the critical assessment of ICT, theinstitutional and social contexts of their development and implementation, as well as their cre-ative uses for active citizenship. Young people - given their large numbers, particularly in de-veloping countries, and enthusiasm and expertise in the use of ICTs - remain an untapped re-source 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 pro-fessionals and researchers, the students and their families, the support services and humanresources of the resources centres, politicians at all levels, social organizations and NGOs, butalso the private sector. However, in the teaching profession, it is necessary to recognize andaccept the need for learning and evolution with regards to ICT.We emphasize the special role that the computing, information science, and engineering pro-fessions have in helping to shape the Information Society to meet human needs. Their educa-tion must encourage socially-responsible practices in the design, implementation, and opera-tion of ICT. The larger Information Society has an equally important and corresponding role toplay by participating in the design of ICT. We, therefore, encourage increased cooperation be-tween 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 develop-ment and in promoting the fulfilment of internationally agreed development goals, includingthose contained in the Millennium Declaration. This is not least true in the reference to accessto information and universal primary education. To secure the fulfilment of these goals, it is ofkey importance that the issue of ICT as tools for the improvement of education is also incorpo-rated in the broader development strategies at both national and international levels.

MediaWe are pleased that the principle of freedom of expression has been reaffirmed in the WSIS IItexts and that they echo much of the language of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights. While we note that the Tunis Commitment recognises the place of the media ina 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 con-sidering 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 thismust be fully recognized both by governments and by Civil Society itself.While recognizing media and freedom of expression, the WSIS documents are weak on offeringsupport for developing diversity in the media sector and for avoiding a growing concentrationand uniformity of content. They specifically neglect a range of projects and initiatives which areof particular value for Civil Society and which need a favourable environment: Community me-dia, telecenters, grassroots and Civil Society-based media. These media empower people forindependent and creative participation in knowledge-building and information-sharing. Theyrepresent the prime means for large parts of the world population to participate in the Infor-mation Society and should be an integral part of the public policy implementation of the goalsof the Geneva Declaration, which refers to the promotion of the diversity of media and mediaownership.

Universal Design and Assistive TechnologiesWe are pleased to note that WSIS has identified the fact that ICT Design is the core issue ofthe Digital Divide for persons with disabilities. The Tunis Agenda for the Information Societyclearly states in its paragraph 90e “paying special attention to the formulation of universal de-sign concepts and the use of assistive technologies that promote access for all persons, includ-ing those with disabilities”. Due to great efforts of all stake holders, in particular of those withdisabilities, we recognize significant advancement in the common understanding on the DigitalDivide of persons with disabilities and strategies to achieve the targets set out in the GenevaPlan of Action to be achieved by ICT development with the Universal Design Concept in combi-nation 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 theprocess of that was addressed in Geneva Declaration of the Global Forum on Disability in theInformation Society in Geneva, we are grateful for all efforts extended by the summit organiz-ers, 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 WSISAction Plan implementation process.We call upon all governments, private sectors, civil society and international organizations tomake the implementation, evaluation and monitoring of all WSIS documents, both from thefirst and second phase, inclusive to persons with disabilities. We urge that persons with disabil-ities be included in all aspects of designing, developing, distributing and deploying of appropri-ate strategies for ICT, including information and communication services, so as to ensure ac-cessibility for persons with disabilities, taking into account the universal design principle andthe use of assistive technologies. We request that any international, regional and national de-velopment program, funding or assistance aimed to achieve the inclusive information societybe made disability-inclusive, both through mainstreaming and disability-specific approaches.We urge all governments to support the process of negotiation, adoption, ratification and im-plementation of the International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in par-ticular through enactment of national legislation, as it contains strong elements concerning in-formation and communication accessibility for persons with disabilities.

Health InformationAccess to health information and knowledge is essential to collective and individual human de-velopment and has been identified as a critical factor in the public physical and mental healthcare crises around the world. The WSIS process has neglected to recognize that health is across-cutting issue and that health systems must include a holistic approach which is integralto the promotion of physical and mental health and the prevention and treatment of physicaland 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 aiddisease stricken, as well as traumatized populations affected by war, terrorism, disaster andother events, and further that the implementation of ICT systems for physical and mentalhealth information and services must be a two-way path recognizing cultural and communitynorms and values.

Children and Young People in the Information SocietyIn WSIS Phase I, the Geneva Declaration of Principles explicitly acknowledged young people, inparagraph 11, as the “future workforce and leading creators and earliest adopters of ICTs” andthat to fully realize this end, youth must be “empowered as learners, developers, contributors,entrepreneurs and decision-makers.” The Tunis Commitment in paragraph 25 reaffirmed thestrategic role of youth as stakeholders and partners in creating an inclusive Information Socie-ty. This recognition is further supported by paragraph 90 of the Tunis Agenda. However we areconcerned as to how key decision-makers from Governments, the business community andCivil Society will realize this commitment when the existing structures are not open for ge-nuine, full and effective participation by youth. None of the Tunis documents, specifically in thepost-WSIS implementation and follow-up parts, clearly defines how youth shall be “activelyengaged in innovative ICT-based development programmes and … in e-strategy processes,” asparagraph 25 states. In this regard, we call upon governments, both national and local, andthe proponents of the Digital Solidarity Fund, to engage young people as digital opportunitiesare created and national e-strategies developed. Youth must be tapped as community leadersand volunteers for ICT for Development projects and be consulted in global and national ICTpolicy-making processes and formulation.While we support the great opportunities that ICTs offer children and young people, para-graphs 90q of the Tunis Agenda and article 24 of the Tunis Commitment outline the potentialdangers that children and young people face in relation to ICTs. For this reason, article 92 ofthe 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 thatWSIS would have encouraged every stakeholder to support a more comprehensive proposalthat ensured that every child, especially those that are marginalized and disadvantaged, hasfree access to ICTs, including but not limited to, toll free landlines, mobile telephones and In-ternet connection. In this regard, strategies should be developed that allow children and youngpeople to reap the benefits that ICTs offer by making ICT an integral part of the formal and in-formal education sectors. There should also be strategies that protect children and youngpeople from the potential risks posed by new technologies, including access to inappropriatecontent, unwanted contact and commercial pressures, particularly with regards to pornogra-phy, pedophilia and sexual trafficking, while fully respecting human rights standards on free-dom of expression. We are committed to work in the WSIS follow-up process towards a worldwhere 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 DimensionsThe Tunis texts would have clearly been stronger if the aspects of the Information Society be-ing people-centred, human rights-based and sustainable development-oriented were seen asthe ethical point of departure in human relationships and community building and equally inbodies of international agreements. These ethical dimensions are foundational to a just, equit-able and sustainable information and knowledge society.Geneva identified the ethical values of respect for peace and the fundamental values of free-dom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, shared responsibility, and respect for nature as enunciatedin the Millennium Declaration. Tunis should have improved on these by including the principlesof trust, stewardship and shared responsibility together with digital solidarity. The technologieswe develop, and the solidarities we forge, must build relationships and strengthen social cohe-sion

Human rights conventions, for example, are critically important in evaluating ICTs so that theyare tools to enable just and peaceable conditions for humanity. But Tunis failed to point in thisdirection. It did not, for example, restate what Geneva considered as acts inimical to the In-formation 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 thesubject of communication and development. Our humanity rests in our capacity to communi-cate with each other and to create community. It is in the respectful dialogue and sharing ofvalues among peoples, in the plurality of their cultures and civilizations, that meaningful andaccountable communication thrives. The Tunis texts did not give clear indications on how thiscan happen.In an age of economic globalization and commodification of knowledge, the ethics and valuesof justice, equity, participation and sustainability are imperative. Beyond Tunis, all stakehold-ers must be encouraged to weave ethics and values language into the working on semanticweb knowledge structures. Communication rights and justice are about making human com-munities as technology’s home and human relationships as technology’s heart.

Element Three: Involvement in Follow-Up and ImplementationIn order to ensure that future implementation and follow-up mechanisms respect the spirit andletter of the Tunis documents and that governments uphold the commitments they have madeduring this second phase of the WSIS, Civil Society mechanisms will be used and created toensure:the proactive monitoring of and participation in the implementation of the Geneva Plan ofAction and the Tunis Agenda at the national level;a structured interaction with all UN agencies and international organisations and regional aswell as national mechanisms for follow-up, to ensure that they integrate the WSIS objec-tives 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 atechnology-centred perspective. The ECOSOC Commission on Science and Technology forDevelopment will have to change significantly its mandate and composition to adequately

Element Four: Lessons Learned for the UN System in GeneralWe see the WSIS process as an experience to be learned from for the overall UN system andrelated processes. We will therefore work with the United Nations and all stakeholders on:developing clearer and less bureaucratic rules of recognition for accrediting Civil Societyorganisations in the UN system, for instance in obtaining ECOSOC status and summit ac-creditation, and to ensure that national governmental recognition of Civil Society entities isnot the basis for official recognition in the UN system; andensuring that all future summit processes be multi–stakeholder in their approach, allowingfor appropriate flexibility. This would be achieved either by recognition of precedents set insummit processes, or by formulating a rules of procedure manual to guide future summitprocesses and day-to-day Civil Society interaction with the international community.