CSTD articles

Major divisions lead to late-night discussions and bland text

The 15th session of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) in Geneva last week produced two draft resolutions to be presented to the ECOSOC meeting in July:

• Assessment of the progress made in the implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)
• Science and technology for developments

The WSIS draft resolution was by far the more controversial, containing text on Internet governance matters. In fact, it almost didn't happen at all, with the chair of the drafting group suggesting late on the Friday night that perhaps they needed to report that they couldn't reach agreement on a way forward. The lack of a resolution would reflect badly on all States involved, and so a draft resolution was eventually agreed to that consisted mainly of text from the previous year, with very little in the way of recommendations for going forward.

The annual meeting of the UN's Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) went badly with delegates finally closing a bad-tempered week-long session at 1.35am on Saturday. Tensions between nations over 'enhanced cooperation' and the role of governments with respect to Internet governance, as well as suggested changes to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) pitted Western nations against the likes of Iran and Saudi Arabia. In the end most of the text delegates had been working on was thrown out in order to reach agreement. Argument will now move onto the UN General Assembly as well as the WCIT conference in Dubai.

The group tasked with deciding on changes to the annual Internet Governance Forum (IGF) has finally released its report, complete with 56 recommendations.

The Commission on Science and Technology for Development's Working Group (CSTDWG) improvements report is due to be discussed at the 15th Session of the CSTD on Tuesday 22 May at the United Nations in Geneva.

The working group began with a hostile and combative environment at its first meeting in Montreux, unable to bridge ideological differences separating initial proposals submitted to the WG. But skillful chairing, the movement of divisive discussions on "enhanced cooperation" to a separate venue, and increased levels of trust built between the stakeholder groups over six meetings finally helped produce recommendations that all members could live with.

[Copy of transcript and audio available on 12 March 2012 ICANN and the Internet Governance Landscape session page]

Bill Graham: I think we should get started, I’m very pleased to see such a large group here for this interesting, I hope, I’m sure will be an interesting session. I want to congratulate all of you who found the place, because I know there’s been confusion about the time and the room, and I truly apologize for that. But some last minute changes were required and that has been the result. But anyway you’re here and I’m very pleased to see you.

I am Bill Graham; I am a Director on the ICANN Board. Markus Kummer beside me is the Vice President of Public Policy for the Internet Society, and we will be co-chairing this event.

The Internet governance dance card gets fuller every year as each stakeholder group adds its own meetings on various isssues to the mix. Below is a list of 12 meetings within the global inter-governmental space to keep an eye on in 2012.

February

1. Panel discussion on freedom of expression on the Internet

To be held during 19th Session of the Human Rights Council (HRC).
When: 27 February - 23 March
Where: Geneva

Both the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and the idea of “enhanced co-operation on public policy issues pertaining to the Internet” are outcomes of the 2005 WSIS document, Tunis Agenda for the Information Society.

Since the Tunis Agenda was adopted by UN Member States, there have been six IGFs, involving thousands of participants, linking stakeholders in different Internet governance areas from around the world, and spawning a number of national and regional IGF initiatives.

CSTDWG chair Peter Major talks with member Izumi Aizu. Photo: Sam Dickinson

In that same time period, there have been sporadic consultations on what "enhanced co-operation" is and should be, with no agreement amongst stakeholders on whether enhanced co-operation is a governments-only co-operation mechanism or is about broader co-operation between governments and all other stakeholders in Internet governance.