Digital Reach

[

] 20

HE IMPACT OF

rapid advances in information and commu-

nication technology has been captured in a variety of

phrases. Those who focus on the remote control functions

that these technologies can facilitate, talk of cyber-society. Those

who believe that the greatest impact is on the vastly increased

possibilities for sharing information and knowledge, speak of an

Information Society or a knowledge society. Yet others who see the

greatest change in the enhanced possibility of communication

and collaboration amongst geographically separated individuals,

speak of a network society. All of these terms reflect a part of the

truth. But one thing that is common to all of them is their depen-

dence on the Internet.

The Geneva phase of the WSIS dealt mainly with the impact

of information technology on the economy and society. It shifted

the focus from technology to the use that is made of it to change

people’s lives for the better. The ten goals and the 11 principles

that it enunciated provide a good structure for policy develop-

ment and operational work. The link with human rights,

freedom of expression, media freedom and access to information

was hotly debated and, in the end, clearly endorsed. The more

practical outcome, in the form of announcements of support,

sought to take innovative experiments to scale and to promote

partnerships.

The central role of the Internet was recognized and the issue of

how it should be managed or governed was discussed at Geneva,

though crucial decisions were left for the Tunis phase of WSIS.

The global Internet today is managed quite efficiently by a set

of private institutions, namely the Internet Corporation on

Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and a host of others.

Some of the key resources are managed by ICANN, and some by

other private corporations that have a contractual relationship

with the US Government. This is a product of the history of the

Internet that started as a US Government-led initiative and was

developed mainly by US technologists. There is widespread

appreciation of the role played by the US Government in the

development of the Internet and general, if not universal, recog-

nition that the US Government has exercised its authority fairly

and responsibly.

The Internet today has become an essential part of the national

and global infrastructure. Many governments depend on its avail-

ability and reliability. In developing countries in particular, the

Internet is used more for public service applications, and hence

there is an even greater desire for engagement among their

governments. This is why the central issue is the way in which the

management of the Internet can be internationalized and how

governments can engage more effectively in public policy issues

that arise. Apart from the management of core resources to ensure

safety, security and fairness in access to them, there are other

public policy issues that concern governments like spam, cyber-

security and cyber-crime.

The Geneva phase of the Summit agreed: “The international

management of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent

and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the

private sector, civil society and international organizations. It

should ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate

access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning of the

Internet, taking into account multilingualism.”

When it came to roles and responsibilities, the Geneva phase

of the summit agreed: “The management of the Internet encom-

passes both technical and public policy issues and should involve

all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international

organizations.” In this respect it is recognized that:

• Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is

the sovereign right of States. They have rights and responsi-

bilities for international Internet-related public policy issues

• The private sector has had and should continue to have an

important role in the development of the Internet, both in

the technical and economic fields

• Civil society has also played an important role on Internet

matters, especially at community level, and should continue

to play such a role

• Intergovernmental organizations have had and should

continue to have a facilitating role in the coordination of

Internet-related public policy issues

• International organizations have also had and should

continue to have an important role in the development of

Internet-related technical standards and relevant policies.

But when it came to organizational modalities, the issue was

referred to the Tunis phase of the Summit and the Secretary-

General was asked to set up a working group “to investigate and

make proposals for action, as appropriate, on the governance of

the Internet”. Towards that end, the working group was asked to:

• Develop a working definition of Internet governance

• Identify the public policy issues that are relevant to Internet

governance

• Develop a common understanding of the respective roles and

responsibilities of governments, existing intergovernmental

and international organizations and other forums, as well as

the private sector and civil society, from both developing and

developed countries.

Most western countries and their Internet professionals wanted

a small group process, while the developing countries wanted

something more open-ended with significant governmental

involvement. The central challenge was to devise a process that

would retain the engagement of three key groups – the Internet

community of technologists and civil society organizations, the

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development coun-

tries, particularly the US, and developing countries.

On Internet governance

Nitin Desai, Special Adviser to the United Nations Secretary-General on WSIS and Chairman

of the Working Group on Internet Governence