- 9 -
WSIS-II/PC-3/DOC/5-E
V.
“Proposals for action, as appropriate”
11
A.
Recommendations related to Internet governance mechanisms
35.
The WGIG addressed the adequacy of current Internet governance
arrangements in relation to the principles outlined in the final WSIS documents
and came to the conclusion that some adjustments needed to be made to bring
these arrangements more in line with the WSIS criteria of transparency,
accountability, multilateralism and the need to address all public policy issues
related to Internet governance in a coordinated manner. It grouped these issues in
four clusters: a forum, global public policy and oversight, institutional
coordination, and regional, subregional and national coordination.
36.
The WGIG recommends the creation of a new space for dialogue for all
stakeholders on an equal footing on all Internet governance-related issues.
37.
With regard to the roles and responsibilities of Governments, the WGIG
decided to put forward different options for the deliberations within the WSIS
context. The four different proposals all complement the forum described in
section V.A.1 below.
38.
The WGIG also concluded that there would be merit in improving
institutional coordination, as well as coordination among all stakeholders at the
regional, subregional and national levels.
39.
The four proposals are set out below.
1.
Forum function
40.
The WGIG identified a vacuum within the context of existing structures,
since there is no global multi-stakeholder forum to address Internet-related public
policy issues. It came to the conclusion that there would be merit in creating such
a space for dialogue among all stakeholders. This space could address these
issues, as well as emerging issues, that are cross-cutting and multidimensional
and that either affect more than one institution, are not dealt with by any
institution or are not addressed in a coordinated manner.
41.
The WGIG also noted that one of its overarching priorities was to contribute
to ensuring the effective and meaningful participation of all stakeholders from
developing countries in Internet governance arrangements. Existing institutions
that address some of these Internet-related public policy issues, such as the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), are not
generally global in their membership and therefore developing countries lack a
forum for discussing Internet-related public policy issues. Other global
institutions are narrower in focus or do not allow for multi-stakeholder
participation. It noted that the existing mechanisms do not sufficiently take into
account geographic balance and linguistic diversity. Their fragmented nature and
structure also make it difficult for developing countries to have their voices heard.
42.
One of the main aims of the WGIG is to foster full participation in Internet
governance arrangements by developing countries. The WGIG placed this aim in
the context of one of the priorities it had identified in the course of its work,
namely, capacity-building in developing countries.
43.
Such a space or forum for dialogue (hereafter referred to as “the forum”)
should allow for the participation of all stakeholders from developing and
developed countries on an equal footing. Gender balance should be considered a
fundamental principle with the aim of achieving an equal representation of
women and men at all levels. Special care should be taken to ensure diversity of
participation as regards, inter alia, language, culture, professional background,
____________________
11
WSIS Declaration of Principles, para. 50 (WSIS-03/GENEVA/DOC/0004).
 |
 |
 |