Workshop on Internet Governance and International Organizations ICANN Meeting - Cairo Wednesday, 5 November 2008 >>PAUL TWOMEY: (inaudible) hello? I'll just talk out of this. We're just waiting for Dr. Govind, the Indian GAC representative who is joining the panel. And I think he might still be in the GAC meeting. So just give him another two or three minutes. I'm technology challenged. I can't turn on a switch. (Pause). >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Good afternoon. So this is the -- Hello. Yes, this is the session on IGF. And this is the microphone that I'm supposed to use. So let me start this session by introducing our guests who will be speaking on this subject. We have Paul Twomey, who will do the introductory remarks and we are going to have Markus Kummer, Markus Kummer, who -- and then Fatimata Seye Sylla, from Africa, the at large. We are going to have Ayesha Hassan, the ICC, and Bill Graham, from ISOC. We -- can I invite to the stage Dr. Govind as the representative of the government of India. Well, I -- And so let's open this session. And I think Paul Twomey, CEO of ICANN, will do the introductory remarks. >>PAUL TWOMEY: Thank you, Roberto. And welcome, everybody. This is a regular feature in the ICANN meeting agendas. And perhaps it's just an indication of how well the concept of Internet Governance Forum has bedded down in this community and the confidence everybody has in the government of India, but -- and perhaps also because lots of people are looking at new gTLDs today. We have a few -- fewer attendees than we normally do. But, nevertheless, we have the translation facilities available for everybody, and we will be streaming this, of course. So that's important for participation. My role, I think, is just to make some introductory comments and potentially just to share with everybody some logistics, as we understand them at least, as it relates to the third meeting of the Internet Governance Forum in Hyderabad, in India. And I've got some talking notes here, and I'm hoping that in going through these, that Markus won't feel that I've taken his complete thunder by talking about what's on the agenda. So the overall theme of the event is Internet for all, which, of course, has been a very high priority for the U.N. as a whole, and particularly for the government of India, with its program for 600,000 villages. And has some subthemes, which are reaching the next billion, promoting cybersecurity and trust, managing critical Internet resources, and emerging issues for each of the four days, respectively. And development capacity-building continues to be a cross-cutting issue across the entire agenda. The meeting agenda is structured around some main sessions, panel discussions and open dialogue involved in those main sessions. Then workshops, best-practice forums, open forums, and dynamic coalitions. That's a -- that's quite -- it's quite a diverse and creative grouping of meetings that now take place within the IGF. There will be eight main sessions, one on access, one on multilingualism, one on cybercrime, one on security, privacy, and openness; one on transitions from IPv4 to IPv6, arrangements for Internet governance, emerging issues, and taking stock and the way forward. And ICANN is coordinating closely with sponsors of the main sessions, especially the ones about multilingualism, security, IPv4/IPv6, and Internet governance arrangements. So there are more than 60 workshops organized. It's going to be a pretty intense effort. And just so that people are aware what the ICANN focus is on that, we'll be organizing one on IDNs, together with ALAC and the APRALO. And we've also got another slot potentially in place for a discussion of the President's Strategy Committee work on improving institutional confidence in ICANN. So I think there's a market there at the moment which probably the issues around that will be resolved this week from our side. We're also organizing an open forum for the multistakeholder model and talk a little bit more about the new gTLDs, IDNs, and fast track. So there's a number of workshops that we're being involved in. There are obviously people here who are participating in other dynamic groups and others who are having meetings in different cross-cuttings. I won't go any further. Obviously, people here will talk in greater detail. But I'll just reinforce yet again, ICANN is an active supporter in the Internet Governance Forum. We're a supporter not only in spirit and participation. We actually also are a financial contributor, and done so in the past, continue to do so. We think this is a very important initiative. We're very conscious that this is an initiative that will be in India this year and here in Cairo next year. And talking to minister Tarek Kamel on Monday. Obviously, he's very interested in paying attention to that for agendas for next year. And I'd just like to perhaps finish the introduction by saying that, you know, again, if you think back four years ago, the different space we're in now because of the dialogue and the engagement that's taken place through such areas such as the Internet Governance Forum, I think, has made a big difference. And my particular thanks to the role Markus plays in that role. I think we appreciate that very much. So that's probably just some introductions, and I'll leave it back to Roberto. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you for the introduction. I think that -- well, a good way to start would be to talk about what is the main expectation that the different stakeholders have about the IGF meeting in Hyderabad. And I would -- So on logistics, I would like to give the floor to each of the panelists. And I would tend to -- If there are questions, unless they are very, very specific and very short, I would like to leave some time towards the end in order to have the questions all together, also, because the different subjects that we are going to talk about are partially overlapping. So maybe to have more meaningful questions at the end. I would also like, when I give the floor in this first round, if every panelist can say just a couple of words about who you are, some of the people in the audience might not know you. So who you are and what is your specific role in respect to the IGF. And that I think talking about what are the expectations that people have of the IGF, that might be a good blend. I would like to start with Dr. Govind, who is going to be the host country representative of the meeting in Hyderabad, if you, please, want to -- >>DR. GOVIND: Thank you. I'm Dr. Govind. I'm a senior director in the ministry of communications and information technology, government of India. And looking after the Internet governance issues in the ministry. And we are proud to have -- host this third IGF meeting in Hyderabad, which is two hours' flight from the capital of the country, New Delhi, where we had ICANN in the beginning of this year, in February. And we look -- warm welcome to the IGF delegates from all over the world, and to participate in this very important global meeting on the Internet proliferation issues and its public policy matters. India looks at the IGF as an evolving platform for furthering the cause of the Internet and its proliferation, public policy issues, where all stakeholders get together to work out discussion on the key areas, like this year, we have in IGF the Internet for all, the main theme. And built around that is the issues on access, multilingualism, diversity, security, and openness. And along with the critical Internet resources. We look forward to a very large participation from all over the world, and including our host country, for this forthcoming IGF meeting. From the logistics point of view, we have put in place the -- with the planning mission from Geneva, all the host country agreement with the U.N. IGF team to put in the venue setup, the protocol, media coverage, the bandwidth, the I.T. infrastructure, Wi-Fi, remote participation, cyber cafés, and all the six U.N. languages interpretation, and all logistical arrangements are in place now. So we look forward to a warm welcome to all the IGF delegates from around the world. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Next, I would like to have Markus Kummer talking specifically from his point of view. >>MARKUS KUMMER: Thank you, Roberto. Markus Kummer, for those who don't know me, I'm the executive coordinator of the IGF secretariat. We have been working very closely with our Indian hosts over the past year. And I think we are set for an excellent meeting at the Hyderabad International Convention Center, which is a state-of-the-art facility for meetings. And I think the infrastructure in place will satisfy the needs of the Internet community. I would like to thank Paul for his introduction and his kind words. Indeed, he makes my job much easier as he outlined the broad program we're going to have in Hyderabad. Allow me maybe to say -- fill in a few of the details and a little bit more on the nature of the various sessions. We departed a little bit from the model we had set in Athens and in Rio, and we have now more focused sessions in the morning, and two panel discussions on a more focused theme, be that on IPv6, transition to IPv6 -- IPv4 to IPv6, for instance, or questions of cybersecurity. And then in the afternoon, we have a more open dialogue without any panelists to allow for a free debate on the issues that were discussed in the morning, which will feed into the session in the afternoon. Paul rightly pointed out the wealth of the events we have in parallel to the main sessions. These are, I think, the events participants bring to the meeting. The ICANN community is organizing a number of these events. There are the meetings ICANN itself is organizing, but there are also events that participants in ICANN meetings, CENTR, for instance, organizing meetings, Nominet is organizing meetings. But the broad themes go, of course, far beyond the remit of what is being discussed in ICANN. And as we have seen in Rio, as we have seen in Athens, there are issues that emerge from these workshops. We had a strong focus on the protection of children in Rio. And this gets, actually, strengthened in Hyderabad. There will be more workshops on the protection of children. Also a new theme on our agenda is access for people with disabilities. There are a number of workshops on that. And also we see now there are dynamic coalitions emerging. There is one on providing access to people with disabilities. There is also a new dynamic coalition that is dealing with the interlinkages between Internet governance and the Internet and climate change. And there are also -- a new coalition is about to form itself on the Internet of things, because it was felt that there was no space, really, to discuss this issue in a multistakeholder setting. So we will have a rich menu on our agenda in Hyderabad. I would like to add a word on enhanced cooperation, which is also on the agenda of this meeting. When, after Tunis, enhanced cooperation was put on the agenda, we decided early on that these were two separate issues. The IGF was one thing, enhanced cooperation is another. But as it happens now at the Hyderabad meeting, for the first time in an IGF context, the discussion will also touch on enhanced cooperation, one of the panel sessions. The panel session on critical Internet resources will discuss what is meant with enhanced cooperation. And, to conclude, maybe a few words on the expectations. From my point of view, my expectation is that we have a good and rich dialogue, and that in itself, I think, is a value that people can take home with. And we said right from the beginning, we always pointed out that the IGF is not a decision-making body, and we cannot produce results in the same way as a traditional U.N. meeting produces a resolution or a declaration. However, we do produce a dialogue, we provide a platform for a dialogue. And the result is what participants take home with. And the dynamic coalitions is one of these results. And the results can also be what an individual participate, be that the government representative, be that the representative from a nongovernmental organization, can take home with and decides, then, to implement in his or her organization or country. So I do understand that there are other people who matter of different expectations, and the expectations vary. The mandate in that sense is fairly open and can be interpreted differently. But so far, the proof of the pudding lies in the eating. And so far, I think people have shown there is interest in having this dialogue and having this exchange of information and opinion and this exchange -- this sharing of best practices. And I think there is value in this model. And I conclude. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you, Markus, for this very extensive and complete contribution. And, actually, you probably read my mind, because I was thinking of having questions specifically on enhanced cooperation. I was keeping that for later. But (inaudible) the subject. Now, I would like to hear for the benefit of the audience, the opinion of the at-large community, the individual users, the expectations (inaudible) Fatimata Seye Sylla, who will explain us this. >>FATIMATA SEYE SYLLA: (Speaking in French) do I need to speak in English? I can speak in English if you prefer. Okay. My name is Fatimata Seye Sylla. I'm a member of ALAC. I'm Senegalese. And I have been involved in the WSIS summit on the topic of IGF as a member of the African civil society. And I must admit that it is a very engaging experience, as Markus just said. Now, regarding the (inaudible) and/or the benefit of Africa within this activity, that's something we, in Africa, are starting to question. Today, I'm here to talk about for the voice of the users. But I think you must know that, in Africa, users -- for them to be able to attend or to understand whatever is happening in the global world, usually they're behind the governments. And what's happening today with IGF in Africa, less and less governments are being involved. Since Rio, I think even when you look at the participation online, governments -- African governments are no longer participating. And the private sector is no longer participating, either. And now we have the civil society taking action in very rare countries. And I must admit that the access, the African Civil Society for the Information Society is really participating in the debates and making suggestions. The point I want to make here is that when we say that IGF is not taking any resolution, that's true. IGF is not -- will not promote an action plan for people. That's true. But how do you see Africa participate in this process through only civil society, as governments are no longer interested? Maybe we should now start thinking about how governments can be involved. Why aren't they anymore participating? Because they don't see any benefit of participating in the IGF. And do we want to discuss any issues -- all the issues related to IGF without Africa? And that's what's happening right now. So this -- I don't have the answers, but I want everybody to think about it. That's all for now. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Before giving the floor to Ayesha, who will give the perspective of the commercial world, can I ask you to move the microphones closer to you. We are having some slight technical problems. So if you keep the microphone closer, it might reduce the echo. Ayesha. >>AYESHA HASSAN: Thank you, Roberto. My name is Ayesha Hassan, and I manage the e-business, I.T., telecoms, and Internet-related policy work at the International Chamber of Commerce, based in Paris. I also manage our initiative, Business Action to Support the Information Society. We like to call it BASIS. This is one of the ways in which we are gathering member companies and associations, and also businesses from around the world that may not be part of the ICC network, to exchange and bring their expertise to events like the Internet Governance Forum. So some of the things that we'll be looking forward to at the Internet Governance Forum in India is, first of all, we do see that there is going to be a strong business participation from across regions. And certainly there's more work to do to bring business from other regions to get more actively involved in the Internet Governance Forum. At the IGF in India, we, as business, do a few things. BASIS has a business briefing every morning, which is open to anybody from business. They don't have to be a member of ICC or BASIS. And it's an opportunity for business people who are present to get to know each other, to learn more about what certain companies or associations are thinking about regarding the issues of the day. The other thing that we will have is a booth. And this is one of the ways that we look forward to being a part of the IGF village, which we find to be an important opportunity for informal networking and for people present from all the different stakeholder groups to complement the exchange that happens in the main sessions and in the workshops and other events by actually having a chance to meet each other and discuss issues that might have come up or to exchange information to be able to build partnerships to do -- work together down the road. This is one of the things that business has really found to be a benefit of the IGF. This is one of the things that business has really found to be a benefit of the IGF. It's an opportunity where my members have found that they meet people that they may not otherwise have a chance to meet from different regions, from different stakeholder groups. And that important relationships and exchanges have happened. And we have full expectation that that will continue in India and help to build greater understanding by giving people an informal opportunity to dialogue and exchange views that may not be -- exchange on divergent viewpoints in order to hopefully come to a better common understanding on some of these issues or at least to work through areas where there may be different perspectives. Another part of the way ICC/BASIS has contributed to the IGF in the past, and will be doing in the IGF in India, is by organizing events. One of the workshops that will be a part of this year with the government of Finland will focus on digital convergence and economic opportunities. We look forward to that workshop, but we also have member companies and associations, experts participating in a variety of the side events and main sessions. And we're very much looking forward to the open dialogue and to the opportunity to hear the viewpoints from other stakeholder groups. I think with that, a real benefit of the IGF for business is also the opportunity to engage with governments, policymakers, and other stakeholders in helping to shape the policy approaches on these issues that will enable business to do its part. So we would just welcome the opportunity to meet more people at the IGF in India, and to further that dialogue. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you, Ayesha. Bill Graham from ISOC. Can you please give us your expectations from the IGF. >>BILL GRAHAM: Sure, thank you very much, Roberto, and fellow panelists. It's nice to be here with you this afternoon. I am Bill Graham, I am in charge of strategic global engagement at the Internet Society, and involved in the multistakeholder advisory group that puts together the IGF each year. ISOC, for those of you who may not be completely familiar with us, is a really multistakeholder group itself. It comes out of the technical community, but also has a significant civil society component, and also business members. So we're kind of a microcosm of the Internet community in some senses. Our mission statement is really the Internet for everyone. So we are really pleased to see the main theme of the IGF this year so closely reflecting our own organization's mission statement. And as you might guess, we're quite heavily involved in organizing and trying to make sure we're participating fully in the IGF. Internally, we're responsible for a lot of the logistical arrangements for some of the major technical organizations in the Internet, like the Internet engineering task force, but we also have a very longstanding program of capacity building and promoting access all around the world. Do a lot of work on standards and technology, and we also have an active public policy program. I have been involved this year as the coordinator for the session on critical Internet resources. The second part of that discussion on national, regional, and international arrangements. And concentrating on enhanced cooperation. ISOC will be running a number of workshops. ISOC, as the large organization, will be doing a workshop on IXPs and another one on multilingualism and how to keep the Internet multilingual, and yet still global. Several of our chapters will also be doing workshops such as one on how to take your Internet further. That's being done by the European ISOC chapters. We also have quite a significant, what we call, an ambassador's program where we had a competitive process and selected 14 Ambassadors, almost all from developing countries, who will be attending the IGF and participating in a lot of the workshops, hopefully N giving us a good presence there. They will also be helping with the ISOC booth in the IGF village. So that's all to say that we really are very active in the IGF. The reason for that, I guess, is because we see this as an extremely valuable forum, as Ayesha was saying, for all the different stakeholders to get together in a room. And really, we see this as a conditioning forum. Many of the topics that are on the agenda this year and in previous years have been fairly difficult or controversial topics to deal with in other areas, including the WSIS. What the IGF does, and what our expectation is here is, that people from all stakeholders can -- stakeholder groups can get together, learn a little bit more about the governance aspects of all of the topics, and then in the afternoon sessions, engage in a really open dialogue and debate on different points of view. We think of it as a conditioning forum because we believe that kind of dialogue will have spillover effects and beneficial effects in other forums that deal with these same topics. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you, Bill. I guess I would like now to move to a different subject that I was already anticipating in my introduction, which is the enhanced cooperation. And maybe we can do, in reverse order. We can start from the other end of the table. And feel free, then, to intervene. But I would like to start with Bill, what is your position, what is the position of your organization? >>BILL GRAHAM: Thanks again, Roberto. Just by way of introduction, I guess I should say the phrase "enhanced cooperation" in the context of Internet governance came out of the Tunis portion of the World Summit on the Information Society. And it really was not too well defined at that time. There has been a lot of anticipation of something being done to enhance cooperation, which is what the WSIS asked to have happen. And most recently, I guess early this year, the under Secretary-General of the United Nations wrote to a series of organizations and asked them to report on what they are doing on the subject of enhanced cooperation and enhancing cooperation in Internet governance. Those organizations were the Council of Europe, ICANN, the ITU, ISOC, the NRO, Number Resource Organization, the OECD, UNESCO, the World Intellectual Property Organization, the World Wide Web consortium, W3C, and through ISOC, the IETF. Most of those organizations have now submitted reports to the U.N. and I have seen, I think, all of them except two now. And they all are reporting that cooperation has, in fact, been enhanced since the WSIS. So that's leading into the session at the IGF this year which is to talk about global, regional, and national arrangements for Internet governance, and specifically enhanced cooperation. And that panel is going to bring (saying name) from the U.N. to report on what they heard back from these organizations I just listed, and then have some government representatives and civil society representatives and business representatives, and people from the Internet community talk about what they understand to be enhanced cooperation and whether anything further needs to be done in this area. Or how that's going to work. From the ISOC perspective, and in our report to the United Nations that you can find on our Web site, we feel that our organization cooperates very broadly with all of the other stakeholders, really, with the international organizations, with governments, and through our membership with civil society and business people as well. So we were quite pleased to have the opportunity to explain that, and also to explain how the bottom-up decentralized Internet model works to the United Nations in response to this request. So I guess as far as what our position is on enhanced cooperation is that we see it as absolutely vital to the ongoing health of the Internet and the spread of access to achieve our goal of the Internet for everyone. And we continue to welcome our opportunities to collaborate and cooperate, and we would really encourage organizations that have not yet opened to the other stakeholders or involved them in discussions around the Internet and Internet governance to enhance their own outreach and their own cooperation. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you, Bill. And who wants to talk next? >>AYESHA HASSAN: Thank you, Roberto. Building on Bill's background on enhanced cooperation, businesses also always viewed enhanced cooperation as being a very important part of the continued development of the Internet and managing Internet policy issues. We see it as building cooperation and communication among organizations and stakeholders and are very pleased to see the amount of enhanced cooperation that has been going on since the WSIS in Tunis. Specifically, we have welcomed the ongoing communication and cooperation among stakeholders that some of the organizations have outlined in their reports. We also look at the IGF itself as an amazing facilitator of this kind of cooperation. It's been a real opportunity of bringing organizations together and building communication and cooperation among them. We would also point to the increased participation of organizations in ICANN meetings as a very good example of the communication that's building. We have representatives from organizations like UNESCO, we will be welcoming the ITU Secretary-General here tomorrow. So we would look at that as also showing that enhanced cooperation is moving forward. I also would like to underscore the regional initiatives, awareness-raising initiatives that have taken place recently regarding the IGF which are building cooperation and communication among stakeholders and organizations at a regional and, in turn, having an impact on the national level cooperative efforts. Thank you. >>FATIMATA SEYE SYLLA: Thank you. I will take on that one. I toss the question to the audience. And we on the ground in Africa have started some action to benefit better from the IGF. And within this framework of cooperation, local regional workshops have been organized with the participation of all the stakeholders. And for example, in Senegal and with AfriNIC, and other stakeholders, regional workshops have been organized to train users, to train technical people, and even government people. And this was organized with the support of the government. And also, in east Africa, a region workshop will be also organized next week. And that's something very -- that's something very, very important, to have the governments involved at the local level. And this cooperation with the different stakeholders at the national level and at the regional level is very important, because at least we will be able to understand better what's going on and it will be easier to organize people on the ground to participate better. Because the main issue in Africa for users is participation. We have problems with access to the infrastructure. And we should be able to at least participate using the (inaudible) to the IGF, but as access is a problem, it is something difficult. And raising awareness about the issues being discussed in IGF. It's true that the civil society is participating, as I said earlier. But it's better to have more people participate in the debates. And that's something where I could not stress enough because participation is not really the way we would like it to be. So what we expect from the other partners is really to work together with them, to organize local workshops for better participation of the end users. I must admit that with ICANN, a lot of thought has been done to have more people participate from Africa to the meetings, and also, they give us the opportunity to discuss with the government people here, for example, during the public meetings organized by ICANN. So I would just encourage, I would just -- sorry, but I don't know what's happening. I am thinking in French today, so I'm not talking the way I would like to talk. So maybe later I will have more to say. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you. We have, also, translations from French into English, so if that makes you more comfortable, and we have also Arabic. So also for the questions from the floor later on. >>FATIMATA SEYE SYLLA: Maybe I am just being intimidated by my friend. [ Laughter ] Because she doesn't like when I say those things. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Markus, you have already touched a bit on enhanced cooperation, but if you have something that you want to add at this point. >>MARKUS KUMMER: I certainly would like to follow-up on what Fatimata has said. I was a little bit preoccupied after her first statement. Obviously we don't want the governments to move away, and obviously we do want African governments to participate in the IGF. And all I said was the Minister from Senegal will be coming and participating in Hyderabad. So I think this is a very important signal that the Minister from a country that has been heavily involved in the WSIS process actually is physically there and shows that he attaches importance. But I was very happy with the second part of your statement which came just now, pointing out to the importance of the national and regional activities that are taking place in Africa. And this, indeed, was one of the messages that came out of the Tunis Agenda, apart from convening the IGF, apart from enhanced cooperation. There was a clear message on the importance of multistakeholder cooperation, and there was a clear message that international cooperation does not work if there's no coordination at the national, at the regional level. And it is interesting to see that now, three years after Tunis, more and more of these national and regional Internet governance forums are beginning to discuss these issues in a multistakeholder setting. And I think that this is the important part, that the governments talk to the technical, to the Internet community, and to civil society and to the private sector. Just a last word on enhanced cooperation. I would very much like to build on what Ayesha said. While enhanced cooperation officially is not part of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum, that I think by bringing people together, by providing a platform for a dialogue among all the various institutions, it has contributed to an improved, to an enhanced cooperation among these organizations. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you, Markus. And now, Dr. Govind, please. >>DR. GOVIND: Thank you. I would take the check from Bill Graham and Ayesha about what they said about the increased and enhanced cooperation. The IGF is a platform, as Markus has said just now, to move forward from Athens to the Rio to the Hyderabad and to Cairo. The way the Internet is proliferating, the way the Internet is making people, all stakeholders to come together at one platform, to discuss the issues of security, discuss the access issues, discuss the multilingualism, to discuss the critical Internet resources. I see a very bright aspect of this IGF as we move forward in all aspects, inclusive of all the stakeholders which are there, whether they are government, public sector, private sector, civil society and business industries. Like the Hyderabad, the beauty is that Hyderabad has been named the Cyberabad. The I.T. industry is a very booming industry in India and that will give -- Ayesha will really love to see that, the bilateral cooperation in the (inaudible) chamber and the ICT chambers and many other bilateral meetings on the sidelines of the IGF on the I.T. and I.T. issues will be there. Then I see ISOC, ICC, UNESCO, ITU, ICANN, they are all coming together. They are there, they are in the part of the discussion, which I see a very good enhanced cooperation with the other organizations which are coming. There is parliamentary forum meetings, a session there. The M.P.s and the parlimentarians are coming together to see the Information Society, how they can take it to the more parliament level. We see India is the second largest mobile population. Like 9 million mobiles are registered every month. And then we see a very big hope for the mobile Internet which is going to come soon. We have three respective (inaudible) locations coming up. And we have a sixth like villages. And for every six villages, we are going to have an information kiosk where all kind of Internet applications are going to be proliferated. So we see a great kind of enthusiasm and the kind of enhanced cooperation in all sectors in the country, as well as outside, which we can learn a lot from these kind of gatherings. We look forward to see the applications, what the other countries have done and how we can duplicate in our own country the models of access, the diversity, the openness and the security aspects. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you for this very interesting presentation of what is happening in India today. I would like now to move to the last item that is under discussion. It is about the future of the IGF. We are now with this meeting midway within the five-year plan. And since I know Markus has a very definite idea and I don't wanted him to intimidate the others, I would like him to speak last so he can freely chime in on this, what is your opinion, expectations on what should happen after this cycle of IGF meetings. Somebody wants to start, get the ball rolling. Ayesha. >>AYESHA HASSAN: Thank you, Roberto. Well, as I said earlier, business values the IGF as an important and pretty unique forum for bringing people together to discuss these issues. So our look to the future is we very much value the format of the IGF and the Advisory Group. We find that the multistakeholder participation on an equal footing is a very important element of the IGF and its the base structure that helps prepare it. With those elements in place, we think that the IGF can continue to be a very important forum for exchange on these issues. Emphasizing the need for more exchange on best practices, as Dr. Govind has mentioned, the opportunity for stakeholders to share their experiences and to learn from each other, also it can continue to provide a very important opportunity for partnerships and alliances to be built. So as we look forward, we look forward with an IGF with its current approach, multistakeholder approach, and a balanced Advisory Group with the current role that it has, as being a valuable way to have the IGF continue to play this role in the future. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you. >>FATIMATA SEYE SYLLA: I think this time I am going to speak in French. With ICANN and again, especially African users. What is currently happening regarding the IGF is that the civil society, which is organizing itself, together with technicians and others, try to bring the stakeholders together and make them -- debates within the IGF. This is what has happened to us recently. I think this is something unique that we should be able to appreciate and valuable to the extent where, this time, we see a process, because civil society -- it's civil society which has become very conscious and aware through its participation and forums on Internet governance. (inaudible) which do not participate as they did in the past in the summit, the WSIS summit. I believe this is an extraordinary opportunity for African countries, and for these people and the private sector, which no longer participates, to come back and discuss with their partners from other countries and discuss the decisions which are occurring at one level. Now, it's true that in Africa, we have our duty to carry out, which consists of preparing ourselves and to bring something to the table as an important element and to say what really interests us and what we wish -- and what we currently want. And I'm not -- and this is participation. And to participate, we must have the means to participate the means to participate, when we talk of the Internet, it's the access to the Internet. And this is where we have to fight (inaudible). And, of course, cooperation, collaboration with others will be most welcome. And this is the framework for discussion, harmonization, and meetings, which will label the convening of these meetings for our discussions. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you. Now we are coming to the next speaker. I have a comment to make regarding access. And I think that there is an important thing which has been proved now by the fact that we have the interpretation, and that is the the ability to express ourselves in our own language or in a familiar language. And this is something which is very important and which we must bear in mind. Thank you. >>DR. GOVIND: -- information technology is the greatest enabler to the inclusive society of the future. The other revolutions which have been happening earlier, the agricultural and industrial revolution, I see the information revolution is the way forward for the uninitiated, untouched part of the world, like we see in the mobile revolution in our country, like we -- there are more than 300 million mobiles and going to reach 600 by 2010. So that's the way the remotest part of the country is connected today, which was not able to be done by your earlier technologies. So we see the Internet is the next revolution, which is the way forward for the people to connect each other, to connect to the socioeconomic issues, to connect to all kinds of applications, all kinds of way forward to work. And the IGF provides an excellent platform. I see the emerging issues is one of the agenda -- as one of the agenda of the IGF, where people see how the future technologies that are going to come, like IPv6. And the way -- I don't know, they may come up with a completely new way of doing Internet in future, which may not be known. And then how these things are discussed and how the people around the world can get benefited from the -- experiencing the other countries' issues and how they can duplicate in their own country. Like, for example, in our country, we have a very good egovernance application, national egovernance plan, where each of the states, we are applying the egovernance of the birth certificates, the railway tickets. We have the highest number of railway ticket booking today. And the cost is a major factor, which the Internet is the enabler, I will say, to help reach the remotest person, to (inaudible) area, e-learning, the e-governance, e-commerce applications, in all the facets of the human applications and technologies. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Bill. >>BILL GRAHAM: Thanks very much. I guess the ISOC point of view about the future of the IGF really can be summed up by saying it's up to the participants and the users of the IGF to show the value that they find in the IGF. If there's value there -- and there are ways of measuring that value that I'll get to -- I think there's a good argument for continuing the IGF. It's important to bring knowledgeable people together to focus on the governance issues surrounding the Internet, because that's -- it's clear to us that the Internet is far from being a mature technology. It's still very much in its adolescence, if I can put it that way. And so it's important to talk about how it can be governed in a way that you're not locking things down. But I think it's also important to take advantage of the fact that the IGF brings together many, many very knowledgeable people and very motivated people from a whole range of parts of society and parts of the world who are affected by the Internet. And that should, ideally, lead to some kind of these partnerships being formed and taking action, not as actions of the IGF, but actions that took their form and their stimulus from the IGF. So, for example, the session on access, one of the main-session workshops, grows out of a series of workshops at the last IGF with people talking about access. And the Association for Progressive Communications, APC, put out a paper since the last IGF where they outlined a really broad consensus of people from the technical community, people from civil society, people from Ayesha's organization and other business people that there really is a consensus forming around what needs to happen to promote access. And that consists of things around the demand side, thing s around the supply side, and some necessary things to deal with government applications where there may not be a commercial basis yet. That, I understand, will -- that dialogue will continue in the main session, and hopefully through the IGF in Hyderabad. And the indications I'm seeing, working on the organizing committee, is that there's a possibility that these different groups will decide to take action to actually prove this consensus that they've come to. To my mind, that's the kind of thing that should come out of the IGF. And it would certainly more than justify its continuation. If it goes the other way, though, and people don't see the value, if participation starts to drop off from any of the stakeholder communities, then I think we really have to question the value of going forward. But, personally, and organizationally, I place myself on the optimistic side. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you very much. And, Markus, you have the last word before opening the floor for questions. >>MARKUS KUMMER: You said I may have definite ideas. I don't really. I mean, we are basically here to listen. And one thing I do know is that the IGF is not a new organization. It was a mandate that was given to the Secretary-General of the United Nations to convene a meeting as a platform for multistakeholder dialogue. And it is a kind of a provisional of a provisional animal, because at the same time, the heads of state and heads of government, in their wisdom, said, after five years, the Secretary-General should examine the desirability of the continuation of the IGF in formal consultations with IGF participants. But then Bill made the point, it's up to the participants to decide whether or not to continue. But then the strange thing comes, the decision was taken in an intergovernmental setting, and the mandate clearly says the Secretary-General should make recommendations either way, whether or not to continue or to stop the forum. But the recommendations go to the U.N. membership. And it will be governments that will decide, based on the recommendations of the Secretary-General. And this process will have to start fairly soon. We will start the discussion in Hyderabad how this formal consultation with forum participants should be prepared and how it should take place. And we will set aside a day of discussions in February 2009, February next year -- that's just a week before the ICANN meeting in Mexico -- to discuss on how to conduct this exercise. And this will be done throughout the year 2009. And then the formal consultations with forum participants will take place at the forum, at the meeting of the IGF in Egypt next year. But we do not want the Egypt meeting to be hijacked by this kind of discussion, whether or not the forum should continue. This will have to be prepared well in advance. But the mandate is clear, it will have to take place in the setting of the IGF in Egypt. And based on that, then the Secretary-General, in his report to the various intergovernmental bodies, will make recommendations whether or not to continue. And in the end, it will be the General Assembly of the United Nations at the end of 2010 that will have to decide. So -- But as I said, I don't have any clear ideas on what the result will be. I just have some ideas on how to get from A to B. And that will have to take place next year, these kind of reflections. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you, Markus. Just one very short comment. I don't see a dichotomy between the two approaches. I'm fairly sure that the decision on the continuation will be taken by the Secretary-General based on the input on the interest that is going to be shown by the stakeholders. That's the beauty of this model, that if everybody is around the table and takes a decision, that makes also the formal decision process much easier. With this, I would like to -- I think -- believe it or not, we are right on time. And so we have set aside some 20 minutes for questions and answers. And so who wants to be the first to take advantage for -- of this? I don't know logistically how we are with the microphones. I'm willing to go around with the microphone. But I fear some echoes. >>Y.J. PARK: Thank you. Is it possible to make a comment instead of the question? I would like to make two comments on the enhanced cooperation and that of governments' participation. Actually, I'm quite concerned by the abuse of the concept of enhanced cooperation at the IGF, because enhanced cooperation seems to be simply interpreted as the principle of multistakeholders or different stakeholders among governments, private sector, and civil society. So the highlight on multistakeholder approach, many times it has led to imbalance among the regions or a capture by some specific regions or countries in the name of enhanced cooperation. That's kind of my -- the experience when I have been serving on the MAG. It could also mean cooperation among different regions. Such a principle has been respected by the U.N. Enhanced cooperation could also mean cooperation among different national IGFs, as Markus told. And so we, as a group, I think collectively do not seem to explore enough on the concept of this enhanced cooperation. And secondly, I would also like to respond to the question Senegal governments, why governments from Africa are not participating in the IGF. I think also your -- it's not limited only to Africa, but also other regions. I'm one of the new mag members of the IGF from this summer and have three months' long experience to interact with other mag members. As the Senegal representative noted, lack of government participation is noted with the formal process. But another dimension I also noted was the different working modalities among different stakeholders. So when we emphasize a lot of these different stakeholder groups, we don't seem to respect the different stakeholders' working modalities. So, for example, I don't think government people interact or communicate in e-mails when they participate in this kind of debate. So a lot of governments' people sort of are not taking place in this kind of e-mail discussion at all, especially when that discussion does not lead to the decision-making processes. I think they are kind of the things we are experiencing at the IGF which we probably want to improve in the future. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: I think that introduces a good question on whether it's the model that has to be adapted to the stakeholder or the stakeholder that has to be adapted to the model. Can you please tell your name and -- >> (saying name). -- I would have loved to have spoken in Arabic, and I would have -- otherwise, I will address you in French. The IGF, as you know, cannot adopt any decisions. It's a forum for discussion. If, at the end of the fifth edition of this forum, we have to extend the mandate of this forum, I think it will be a good idea not to give in to decision-making, but, rather, recommendations which compel decide, or decision-makers at all levels to apply these recommendations to their own decisions. Thank you. >>ADAM PEAKE: My name is Adam Peake. I work for a university in Tokyo, Japan. I wanted to just follow up on something that Fatimata was saying about some of the African initiatives, and particularly the one that's going to happen next week in Nairobi. It's an East African Internet Governance Forum. And the URL for that -- I would recommend that you have a look, because the information there is extremely rich -- is www.eaigf.or.ke. And it's a model for both national and regional participation in Internet governance processes. There's been online discussion in Tanzania, in Uganda, Rwanda, and Kenya, followed up by regional -- followed up by national meetings which are going to feed into this regional meeting next week. You'll see from the draft program that it's a very high-level meeting, with participants from senior areas in business, in civil society, and governments from the region. So it's a richness that I think IGF can bring to developing countries, but also the national IGFs that are taking place in Europe. I know that they've taken place in the United Kingdom and also Germany and other places. But I really do suggest that this -- the East African IGF Web site is an example of particularly how African countries and African users are getting involved in this discussion. Thank you. >> Thank you. My name is Eberhard Blocher, from Germany. I run a small business in Germany related to the Internet. I would just like to recap what Markus Kummer said at the very beginning. And I would like to -- I would be interested to have comments from panelists on this very first topic, because Markus said, in Hyderabad, more than in Rio, the protection of children will be a very major topic. I think that was the first point he made in his presentation. And I didn't hear anything on that topic from anybody else. So perhaps somebody would like to fill me in on the topic of protection of children at the IGF, or also what ICANN could be doing in that respect. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: So on this question, and on some of the elements raised by other comments -- are there any of you who would like to say a few words? For instance, should the IGF be -- take more decisions? And is there interest also by other parties about protection of children? Any of the issues brought up by the audience that you want to -- >>FATIMATA SEYE SYLLA: I would like to support the idea expressed concerning improving preparation among the regions. I believe the idea is an important one, particularly among developing countries, because usually problems resemble one another, and it would be good to benefit from the experience of others. I am also in favor of having IGF in the future, not during the present mandate, would be in a position to formulate recommendations for the users to benefit. Usually there are meetings held locally, and we can benefit from the recommendations that emerge from them. And in future, such recommendations should at least emerge as discussion topics or themes at the level of IGF in order to become recommendations at the work level. As for the protection of children, Africa is more than interested, because here again, the security of the users is at stake. I say the same thing for developing countries everywhere. We don't have the means to follow the possibilities of having children, or even adults, (inaudible) if they remain -- I think it's a matter of interest to all parties and should be a matter of interest to the private sector. >>AYESHA HASSAN: -- there are going to be a number of workshops focusing on child protection issues at the IGF in India. And business is involved in some of the self-regulatory initiatives and also involved in building partnerships with the other entities that are involved in these issues, with law enforcement agencies and entities like the Council of Europe, et cetera. So there will be some very rich exchange at the IGF in India. And I know some of our member companies are looking forward to sharing the challenges that they face as businesses in helping to, together, build appropriate and informed policy approaches for these very important issues. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: There are no -- Markus. >>MARKUS KUMMER: Just on the protection of children, just to underline that it is a consolidation I think that was started in Rio by various workshop organizers pooling resources, also cross-regional areas, organizations from Europe with organizations in Asia, exchanging experiences and sharing best practices. And this is really an issue which has shown can only be tackled in a multistakeholder cooperation where you can actually find practical solutions. I would like to add a word on the proposal that the IGF should work more towards making recommendations. It is already possible in the mandate. It says "as appropriate, the IGF can make recommendations." In diplomatese, that means never. When somebody doesn't agree, you add "as appropriate." Of course, the mandate can be reviewed in the revision process, and, again, the governments, in their wisdom, will listen to the consultations and may decide that this part of the IGF should be strengthened and have more teeth. At the same time, I would like to point out that in the U.N., which is basically built on the model of producing resolutions, producing declarations, it is increasingly that nonbinding form that is used for meeting. I just noticed that on the Web site of the U.N., there's a meeting in Beijing that will taken place on sustainable development on ICT and climate change. And it's clearly labeled as a "forum," and it is marketed as promoting a dialogue free from the constraints of negotiation. So it's interesting to see that there's a cross fertilization from the traditional -- between the traditional world of diplomacy and the kind of dialogue we are practicing, because I think one of the -- I would say of the essential characters of the IGF is precisely that there is no constraint to produce anything in the form of a decision. There's no constraint of negotiation. And this precisely allows for a much freer dialogue. It allows for a higher quality of dialogue. And the tone of dialogue changes immediately if, at the end, you will have to produce a negotiated text, which can be, of course, a recommendation, usually is a recommendation, is a negotiated outcome. These are just my comments on these. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: I think it was a very interesting comment, observation from your part. I think that's very true. Do you want to add something? >>BILL GRAHAM: Just -- >>DR. GOVIND: We can only -- sorry. We have a child pornography act which is recently part of our I.T. act. And there will be workshops there specifically on these kind of child pornography issues. And globally we can have exchanges of views and information to help further how we can tackle these kind of issues. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you. >>BILL GRAHAM: Thank you. Yes, I'd just like to build a little bit on what Markus said and my observation of what has taken place in this area over -- through the WSIS and now. And I think it really is important, as several people have said, for governments to participate in the IGF and really understand the shape and size of the issues and different approaches to it from different stakeholders. But I really think, in terms of making decisions or recommendations, it's important to look at where decisions actually tend to take effect. And at this point, it -- I would contend it really is much more at the national level. So I think what -- as Markus was saying, what's important about a forum like this, where you're not actually driving towards the precise words of a recommendation or a decision, is that governments should be taking part in the discussions, and then taking what they heard, what they learned, the products of their deliberations with others back to their national processes just to fit the national norms and cultural differences that really are quite significant, and then make their decisions at the level where they can be effectively implemented. That said, there are some broad, universal themes, and I think protection of children is clearly one of those, where probably -- there is definitely a need for a broader, multilateral action. One of the most interesting things about that discussion in Rio was an unscheduled session that took place after several others -- several sessions on protecting children. And that ad hoc session brought together advocates of child protection with advocates of free speech. To my knowledge, that was the first time that those strong advocates of the two sides of the coin came together in the same room and explored commonalities and differences and really came to understand much better the things that drove both of them. And that kind of thing, I think, is an extremely effective output that would never happen if you were in a decision-making forum. And that kind of thing, I think, is an extremely effective output that would never happen if you were in a addition-making forum. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you, thank you. We have less than a handful of minutes, and I have two more interventions from the floor, and then we will close. >>FUATAI PURCELL: Thank you very much. My name is Fuatai Purcell. I am from San Juan. I want to make a couple points. I was involved in the IGF throughout the WSIS process. I was also privileged to have spent a few months working at the IGF Secretariat in Geneva, and also participated at the first IGF in Athens. The IGF, from my experience, and the specious of a lot of people that participated in the first IGF in Athens, this is a forum without any decision-making, as already explained. The key or important thing, or the most important aspect of IGF is sharing of information, best practices, and also networking. There's a lot of information, a lot of things that everybody can learn from different and diverse workshops. So this is the one thing that comes to mind when people think of IGF. Second point is regarding the participation of governments. I believe that I can only speak on behalf of my own government, and also some of the small Island developing states in the Pacific. There is no sense of not wanting to participate, because I know for a fact that we have learned a lot from the IGF, first IGF. The constraint, the main constraint why governments from my part of the world cannot participate is funding. This is the key issue. But everything -- We are all involved because the IGF sends the information and invitations and things like that. Thirdly, and the final point is the future of IGF. I really believe that given its uniqueness in terms of everything else that has been explained before, I believe that the IGF should continue, because the Internet and mobile phones are not going to stop anywhere or anytime soon. In fact, it's evolving, you know, and it's continuing. So therefore, IGF is filling one of the gaps. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you very much. And the last comment. >>OLGA CAVALLI: Just a brief comment. My name is Olga Cavalli from Argentina. I am a member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group. I would like to comment about remote participation project that we are working on. We are building hubs in different parts of the world. In Argentina, we are setting up a hub. And I would like very much to thank our host in India, that they have been willing to train us online with an excellent quality of technical staff. I have been working on the software, Dimdim, which is excellent. So it is not a lot of money. Just an Internet connection, a camera and a place. And we hope to have it for allowing people participating from our country. Thank you. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you. >>DR. GOVIND: Thank you. I just want to say that our governmental long with NIXI along with Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal and Mr. Naresh Ajwani. I would say they are the players who made this remote hub participation work, in Hyderabad, Dimdim, as you know. So they are here, and I would like to thank them also along with this initiative that we have taken on in this area. >>ROBERTO GAETANO: . Okay. Thank you very much. I think that it was a very useful section, very interesting. A lot of participation, a lot of comments, and very good contribution. We have learned that, still, there is interest from every stakeholder in participating in this process, to bring it forward. I have heard we have some problems, some open issues, some problems, like security for instance has been evoked. So there is still some work ahead but I think we are going in a good direction, and so with these words of hope, I would like to close this section and thank everybody for their contribution, starting from the speakers, but also the audience. Thank you. [ Applause ]