Internet Governance session

Archive: Video | Transcript

Abstract

This session, drawing from high-level representatives of multiple stakeholders from Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka, seeks to help achieve a better understanding, and possibly help stakeholders from the South Asian region move toward a broad agreement on the future of the Internet Governance Forum. This session is an open discussion and anyone is welcome to participate.

i-GOV Session - Background Information

Discussion

Of particular interest to this session are the views of stakeholders in South Asia with regards to the future of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Many positions on improvements of the Forum have been articulated, but there is still no broad agreement about the future course of the IGF.

On one hand, there are those stakeholders, such as the Internet academic, technical and business communities that have proposed to work on improvements to the IGF based on the premise that the IGF should continue to be a multistakeholder forum, supported by multistakeholder voluntary funding mechanisms with an independent Secretariat. Furthermore, they suggest keeping the IGF as a space for open dialogue rather than a space to negotiate decisions, approve resolutions or recommend the adoption of specific policies.

On the other hand, there are views, for example those expressed by the trilateral IBSA mechanism (India, Brazil and South Africa), that propose a revision of the IGF’s original mandate for it to become more outcome-oriented; to have the capacity to make policy recommendations; have an expanded Secretariat located within the UN system; and even suggest the creation of a new global Internet policy decision-making body.

The Internet Governance session in APNIC 33 provides a platform for sharing views about the future of the IGF. High-level speakers from India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka will present views from South Asia and ideally, the session will result in achieving broader consensus on how to improve the IGF.  The following questions may guide the debate:

1. How to secure more participation from governments and other stakeholders, particularly from developing countries, at the next IGF?
2. Should national and regional IGF initiatives be encouraged?
3. How could these initiatives better connect with the global IGF?
4. What improvements to the program structure and reporting mechanisms of the IGF could increase the value of its outcomes?
5. What enhancements to working methodology and preparatory process of the IGF can be implemented?
6. How the role of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group may evolve to organize future versions of the IGF?
7. Are there better platforms available for remote participation in IGF related activities?
8. How to establish linkages of coordination and cooperation with other relevant Internet governance organizations?

N Ravishanker, Additional Secretary, Department of Information Technology, MCIT, Government of India

Mr.Hasanul Haq Inu, MP, Honorable Chairman of the PSC on MOPT, Bangladesh

Paul Wilson, Director General, APNIC