Open Forum #48 Implementation of the Global Digital Compact

Summary

This discussion focused on implementing the Global Digital Compact (GDC), adopted by consensus in September 2024, with particular emphasis on digital inclusion and protecting vulnerable populations. The panel, moderated by Filippo Pierozzi, brought together representatives from UNESCO, civil society organizations, government agencies, and UNHCR to explore how high-level commitments can translate into concrete actions on the ground.

Guilherme Canela De Souza from UNESCO emphasized that implementation should begin immediately, as the GDC builds upon existing frameworks rather than creating entirely new structures. He highlighted UNESCO’s work on information integrity and capacity building for public servants, noting that the compact connects multilingualism with meaningful connectivity. Thobekile Matimbe from Paradigm Initiative stressed the disconnect between global commitments and local implementation, particularly in Africa where 38% of the population remains offline. She emphasized the need for awareness-raising and capacity building among civil society organizations and national human rights institutions.

Leanda Barrington Leach from Five Rights Foundation discussed the strengthened child protection provisions in the GDC, noting that children’s rights were initially weak in early drafts but became central through civil society advocacy. She emphasized that digital inclusion for children must occur within a rights-respecting environment, as current commercial incentives lead to exploitation and harm. Eugenio Garcia from Brazil’s government highlighted how the G20 presidency aligned with GDC priorities, including universal connectivity, digital public infrastructure, information integrity, and AI governance.

Katie Drew from UNHCR addressed the particular vulnerabilities of refugees in the digital space, noting how online hate speech translates to real-world harm. She emphasized the importance of multi-stakeholder partnerships and the development of practical tools like UNHCR’s information integrity toolkit. The discussion concluded with recognition that successful implementation requires strengthening multi-stakeholder mechanisms, building capacity among regulators and civil society, and ensuring meaningful participation from affected communities, particularly those in the Global South.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **Implementation challenges of the Global Digital Compact (GDC)**: The need to move from high-level commitments to concrete, grassroots implementation, with emphasis on cascading global agreements down to local communities and ensuring meaningful impact rather than just policy documents.

– **Digital inclusion and connectivity gaps**: Addressing the 2.6 billion people still offline globally, with particular focus on meaningful connectivity rather than just access, and the specific challenges faced by vulnerable populations including refugees, children, and communities in the Global South.

– **Child protection in digital spaces**: The strengthening of children’s rights provisions in the GDC through advocacy, the need for age-appropriate design of digital services, and addressing commercial incentives that exploit children online through behavioral manipulation and harmful content exposure.

– **Information integrity and combating online harm**: Addressing misinformation, hate speech, and toxic narratives that particularly target vulnerable populations like refugees, while balancing freedom of expression with protection from harm, especially in polarized political contexts.

– **Multi-stakeholder coordination and capacity building**: The importance of strengthening multi-stakeholder approaches, building capacity among regulators and civil society, and coordinating between various UN processes (GDC, WSIS+20, G20 initiatives) to avoid duplication and ensure coherent implementation.

## Overall Purpose:

The discussion aimed to explore how the Global Digital Compact can be effectively implemented to deliver meaningful digital inclusion for vulnerable populations, moving beyond high-level policy commitments to practical, ground-level impact through coordinated multi-stakeholder efforts.

## Overall Tone:

The discussion maintained a constructive and collaborative tone throughout, with speakers demonstrating both urgency about implementation challenges and optimism about potential solutions. While acknowledging significant obstacles (political polarization, resource imbalances, capacity gaps), the conversation remained solution-oriented, with participants sharing concrete examples of ongoing initiatives and expressing commitment to multi-stakeholder cooperation. The tone was professional yet passionate, reflecting the speakers’ deep engagement with these issues and their determination to translate global commitments into real-world improvements for vulnerable communities.

Speakers

– **Filippo Pierozzi**: Moderator/Chair of the session, works on implementation of the Global Digital Compact

– **Guilherme Canela De Souza**: UNESCO Director for Digital Inclusion, previously worked on information integrity at UNESCO

– **Thobekile Matimbe**: Senior Manager for Partnerships and Engagement at Paradigm Initiative (civil society organization)

– **Leanda Barrington Leach**: Executive Director of Five Rights Foundation, active in protecting child rights in the digital domain

– **Eugenio Garcia**: Director for Science, Technology, Innovation and Intellectual Property, Government of Brazil, formerly Deputy Consul General in San Francisco

– **Katie Drew**: Senior Manager at UNHCR covering information integrity, works on refugees and vulnerable populations globally

– **Mohammad Abdul Haque Anu**: Secretary General of Bangladesh Internet Governance Forum

– **Wolfgang Kleinwachter**: Retired Professor from University of Aarhus

– **Jaqueline Trevisan Pigatto**: Representative from Data Privacy Brazil (Civil Society)

– **Adel Maged**: Judge at Egyptian Court of Cassation, Honorary Professor of Law at Durham University

Additional speakers:

None identified beyond the speakers names list provided.

# Comprehensive Report: Implementing the Global Digital Compact for Digital Inclusion and Vulnerable Populations

## Executive Summary

This panel discussion, moderated by Filippo Pierozzi who works on implementation of the Global Digital Compact (GDC), brought together representatives from UNESCO, civil society organizations, government agencies, UNHCR, and academic institutions to examine how the recently adopted GDC can be effectively implemented to achieve meaningful digital inclusion for vulnerable populations.

The conversation focused on translating high-level commitments into concrete action, with speakers emphasizing the need for immediate implementation, capacity building, and multi-stakeholder engagement. Key challenges identified included the gap between global policy commitments and local realities, resource constraints, and the need for better coordination among various digital governance processes.

## Key Discussion Points

### Immediate Implementation Without Delay

Guilherme Canela De Souza, UNESCO Director for Digital Inclusion, emphasized that implementation should begin immediately without waiting for additional frameworks. He noted that the GDC’s strength lies in creating a comprehensive framework that builds upon existing commitments across the UN system. Canela De Souza shared a story about the “syndrome of Adam” in Latin American politics, referring to politicians who believe “the world started with ourselves,” to illustrate the importance of building on existing work rather than starting from scratch.

Filippo Pierozzi reinforced this point, stating that “the train has left the station” for GDC implementation and that stakeholders should focus on concrete action rather than further framework development.

### Ground-Level Implementation Challenges

Thobekile Matimbe from Paradigm Initiative provided a stark assessment of current implementation gaps, particularly in Africa. She noted that with only 38% of Africa’s population online, the continent faces massive digital exclusion. Matimbe emphasized that “on the ground, there’s no real implementation of the GDC or even acknowledgement that it’s such an important document with key commitments that have been made towards things that are critical to the African continent and specifically connectivity.”

She stressed the urgent need for awareness-raising and capacity building among civil society organizations and national human rights institutions, arguing that meaningful consultations with stakeholders at country level should feed into global submissions.

### Children’s Rights in Digital Spaces

Leanda Barrington Leach from Five Rights Foundation highlighted that “children have been forgotten really from the start” in digital space design. She noted that children’s rights provisions in the GDC were initially weak but became central through sustained civil society advocacy. Barrington Leach argued that “there is a very strong commercial incentive to ignore children’s rights and to very heavily exploit children on the services that they use online,” citing examples of anxiety, depression, and self-harm caused by current digital services.

She emphasized that self-regulation has failed and that robust regulation of the tech sector is urgently needed, while also noting the massive imbalance of power and resources between civil society/regulators and tech companies.

### Government Coordination and Strategic Alignment

Eugenio Garcia, representing Brazil’s government as Director for Science, Technology, Innovation and Intellectual Property, highlighted Brazil’s strategic approach during its G20 presidency, aligning G20 and BRICS priorities with GDC objectives across four key areas: universal connectivity, digital public infrastructure, information integrity, and AI governance.

Garcia emphasized that “maybe we should ask developing countries what their priorities are, if this is what they need or what they want,” highlighting the importance of centering Global South perspectives in global frameworks. He also discussed Brazil’s upcoming hosting of COP30 in the Amazon, with plans for innovative connectivity solutions.

### Humanitarian Perspectives on Vulnerable Populations

Katie Drew from UNHCR brought attention to the particular vulnerabilities of refugees in digital spaces, providing examples of how online hate speech translates to real-world harm. She highlighted that “online hate towards foreigners, including refugees, resulted in real life harm” including “destruction to property, but also resulted in death, ultimately.”

Drew discussed UNHCR’s work on information integrity toolkits and highlighted legal and regulatory barriers that prevent refugees from accessing internet and mobile services, emphasizing the need for evidence-based advocacy and multi-stakeholder partnerships.

## Implementation Initiatives Highlighted

### UNESCO’s Concrete Actions

Canela De Souza outlined several ongoing UNESCO initiatives:

– Capacity building for public servants on digital transformation and artificial intelligence through an alliance of national schools of public administration

– Development of guidelines on digital platform governance that balance information integrity with freedom of expression

– A global initiative on information integrity and climate change that supports grassroots knowledge production

– Work with journalists, judges, and regulators on digital literacy and governance

### Brazil’s Strategic Initiatives

Garcia highlighted Brazil’s leadership in several areas:

– Coordinating G20 and BRICS priorities with GDC objectives

– Developing innovative connectivity solutions for COP30 in the Amazon

– Focusing on AI governance that is development-oriented to reduce inequalities

– Addressing information integrity within G20 frameworks for the first time

### UNHCR’s Protection Work

Drew mentioned specific initiatives including:

– Development of information integrity toolkits

– “Displaced and Disconnected” research conducted with DLA Piper

– Evidence-based advocacy on legal barriers to refugee connectivity

## Challenges Identified

### Capacity Building Needs

Multiple speakers identified capacity building as a fundamental requirement. Canela De Souza emphasized the need for capacity building among public servants, while Matimbe stressed awareness-raising among local actors. Barrington Leach noted that civil society and regulators lack capacity to effectively regulate the tech sector.

### Digital Divide Persistence

Speakers acknowledged that connectivity remains a major barrier, with Garcia noting that one-third of the world’s population remains offline. Matimbe’s data showing only 38% of Africa’s population online highlighted the scale of digital exclusion, while Drew’s examples of legal barriers to refugee connectivity demonstrated specific policy obstacles.

### Coordination Challenges

Wolfgang Kleinwachter, retired Professor from University of Aarhus, raised concerns about the need to avoid isolating GDC implementation from other processes, particularly WSIS Plus 20. He suggested strengthening cooperation between these processes, potentially through adding a multi-stakeholder advisory group to existing mechanisms.

## Questions Raised

### Accountability and Measurement

Jaqueline Trevisan Pigatto raised questions about establishing targets and metrics for GDC implementation, highlighting the need for clear accountability mechanisms. Pierozzi emphasized the importance of moving “from correlation to causation” in measuring the impact of global frameworks.

### Grassroots Inclusion

Mohammad Abdul Haque Anu from Bangladesh Internet Governance Forum asked about ensuring meaningful inclusion of grassroots and national-level voices from the Global South, while highlighting specific challenges such as legal restrictions preventing Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh from accessing mobile connections.

### Institutional Coordination

Several participants raised questions about how to coordinate GDC implementation with other ongoing processes and ensure that multiple frameworks reinforce rather than compete with each other.

## Emerging Priorities

### Information Integrity

An important focus emerged around information integrity as a critical priority requiring immediate attention. This consensus spanned UN agencies, government representatives, and humanitarian organizations, showing broad recognition that misinformation and online hate have concrete consequences for vulnerable populations.

### Meaningful Connectivity

Speakers emphasized moving beyond simple connectivity metrics to focus on meaningful connectivity that enables genuine participation in digital environments, including access to relevant content and services.

### Rights-Respecting Digital Inclusion

The discussion highlighted the importance of ensuring that digital inclusion occurs within rights-respecting environments designed with vulnerable populations in mind, rather than simply providing access to potentially harmful systems.

## Conclusion

The discussion demonstrated both the potential and challenges of implementing the Global Digital Compact for digital inclusion and protection of vulnerable populations. While speakers showed strong agreement on the need for immediate action, capacity building, and inclusive approaches, they also highlighted significant barriers including resource constraints, coordination challenges, and the gap between global commitments and local realities.

The conversation was notable for its focus on concrete implementation challenges and ongoing initiatives, moving beyond framework development to examine practical obstacles and solutions. The diversity of perspectives provided a comprehensive view of both opportunities and constraints facing GDC implementation.

Success will require sustained multi-stakeholder collaboration, continued investment in capacity building particularly in the Global South, and innovative approaches to bridging the gap between global commitments and local implementation. The concrete initiatives already underway provide models for scaling and adaptation, while the questions raised highlight areas requiring continued attention and development.

Filippo Pierozzi: Hi everyone. Welcome to the session. I hope you can hear me and you’re all tuned in on channel one for this workshop. And I realized that we are going to be talking about the implementation of the Global Digital Compact. Thank you all for not being in the room next door that has a way cooler title because they are talking about closing the computing gap on AI. This sounds crucial, but I hope that my fellow panelists will explain how what we’re talking about here about the implementing the Global Digital Compact is relevant as well. And the focus of this chat this afternoon will be on how the Global Digital Compact can deliver for inclusiveness and can deliver for our constituency, for the people on the ground and especially for vulnerable people. I’m delighted to be joined and I will make a round of introduction and I will leave them the floor. From your right to the left we have Guilherme with UNESCO is a director in his wearing his new hat of director for digital inclusion. Some of you might know him for his previous work still at UNESCO on information integrity to be killer. And she’s a senior manager, I think, for a service. Correct me if I’m getting the title wrong to get it from part of the initiative, a civil society organization. She’s a senior manager for partnerships and engagement to my right. And Linda from she’s the executive director of five rights and a foundation active in protecting child rights and in the digital domain and beyond the digital domain. Eugenio from Marathi from the government of Brazil is a director for science, technology, innovation and. intellectual property and definitely a person that you might want to follow on LinkedIn, and formerly a Deputy Consul General in San Francisco and a thought leader in this area. Last but not least, we have Katie from UNHCR. She works in a number of countries around the globe working on refugees and vulnerable population. Now she’s a Senior Manager for covering information integrity and in a second we’ll hear more from them. Maybe to set the stage of where we are, what is this Global Digital Compact thing, what they’ve been doing within the United Nations system so far. You probably all know if you’re here that the Global Digital Compact was adopted in September 2024 by consensus by the world leaders and what we’ve been thinking over the last few months is how we can best support member states to deliver on their ambition, how we can start implementing the Global Digital Compact in the areas where member states decided that action has to be taken by the UN. There are several initiatives that have already started in different areas. You can think of the Working Group on Data Governance established within the CSTD in Geneva. You can think of the ongoing negotiations in New York to establish a scientific panel on artificial intelligence and a global dialogue on AI governance. And way more than that, there is an upcoming report of the Secretary-General on innovative financing options for capacity building and there are plenty more activities that are being started and implemented by different parts of the system. And of course, there is all of you, there is civil society, there is the technical community, there is the private sector that are already taking actions. that rhyme very well with the Global Digital Compact. Inside the UN we have a very good cooperation mechanism labelled Working Group on Digital Technology that is led by the Office for Digital and Emerging Technology and by ITU, with several co-chairs from all the relevant agencies, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, UNESCO, UNDP, UNU, UNIDO, UNCTAD and plenty more and we are using that to coordinate. There are plenty of opportunities for all of you to hear about updates of what we have been doing. We are hosting some of the town halls and of course I highly encourage you to engage with the different entities and agencies of the UN that are leading the substantive work. After this chapeau, this conversation is not about bureaucratic structure or it’s not about explaining what has been done, how we got to the Global Digital Compact but it’s about what’s coming next and how different activities are contributing to this goal. Guilherme, maybe the question for all of you is how this digital inclusion dimension that is in the Global Digital Compact, how the activities that you’re working on are contributing to that and I know that UNESCO hosted recently an event for public sector and artificial intelligence but also I would be very curious if you could touch upon the information integrity space so Katie might close the circle after that.

Guilherme Canela De Souza: Thank you very much Filippo for the kind invitation, for being here, thank you all for being resistant and resilient until this late time in the day. Let me start, many years ago I interviewed the former president of a Latin American country And I asked him, what do you think was the most interesting thing you learned for being a president? And then he told me, I learned that we all, politicians at least, according to him in Latin America, we have the same syndrome. That is the syndrome of Adam. We think the world started with ourselves. And I’m saying this because the global digital compact beauty is not about exactly proposing something entirely new, although there is one or two things very interesting that are new. It’s the huge and interesting exercise of looking across the border in the UN system, but also in the concrete policies in our 190 plus member states, and trying to come with a comprehensive framework saying, those are the key areas that we agree that are urgent for the immediate future. And with this, if what I said is true, that this facilitates a lot the logic of implementation, because we can take this commitment and say, look, what we are doing here is trying to help you to be more coherent in what you are already doing, and in what you committed, in this case in New York, etc. The big problem that the same politician told me that he faced when he was president is that they have a tendency to approve a law and so on, and a policy, and then the next step is to create a committee for deciding how to implement the law. So it’s another layer. So we don’t need to wait anything. If you want to take just one takeaway of what I’m going to say here during this session, we need to start implementing now, and it’s ready, and there is there, the urgencies are there, and the concrete elements are there. The commitments were made last year in New York. Of course, we can always go deeper in the details of this and that, but it’s ready to be implemented, and it’s urgent to be implemented. In that sense, two quick examples. The Global Digital Compact has touched several areas of the agenda of UNESCO, Filippo mentioned information integrity, there are important issues related, for example, to independent media and so on. So we have several structures in UNESCO, for example, there is an intergovernmental body called IPDC that deals particularly with this part. There is another one called IFAP that deals more with the digital transformation part. So what we are doing in UNESCO is, from the moment it was approved to convey to our constituencies, also using the WSIS framework, etc., our constituencies of journalists, of judges, of regulators, of electoral authorities, saying, here it is, here are the key elements of the Global Digital Compact that you can start implementing now and here are the tools from UNESCO that you can use to be implemented. For example, we are Secretariat of the International Decade of Indigenous Languages and you see how the Global Digital Compact and the Pact of the Future connected a lot the agenda of multilingualism with the overall idea of meaningful connectivity and so on. Again, we don’t need to create another story, we need to say to these structures of multilingualism, let’s start implementing this immediately. And then to conclude, two things. Capacity building, of course, is a major story there. Several of the Member States were very adamant on that, so this conference that Filippo mentioned, we did a few weeks ago a conference in Paris, concentrated on this aspect, capacity building of public servants on the aspects of digital transformation, artificial intelligence, and we create an alliance of national schools of public administration, so those that are in charge of training public servants, and we are discussing with them precisely how they can incorporate the Global Digital Compact and start implementing this in the in-service and pre-service training of public servants. And then final aspect, and this is one of the very important innovations of the Global Digital Compact, is to bring the discussion of information integrity to the heart. of the overall discussion of digital policies. And in that case, many of you followed, UNESCO launched prior to the compacted global guidelines for the governance of digital platforms with a strong set of recommendations on how to do information integrity policies while protecting freedom of expression, access to information, as you can imagine, easy to say, not as that easy to do. But several of these networks of regulators are using these guidelines and now connecting with the Global Digital Compact to move forward. So I’ll stop here, but glad to take questions later on.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you, Guilherme, and absolutely on your first point that we need to start implementing now. Tove Chile, thinking the question is the same, how we can encourage this inclusion dimension. I’m thinking that some of your digital inclusion programs that you run, I know they’re done, digital readiness program, you have software engineering school, projects that make a concrete impact on the ground. What’s their relationship with these high level commitments of a global framework? And how do you mainstream it in the activities that you do? How do these things go together?

Thobekile Matimbe: Thank you so much for that. And thanks for mentioning that this is high level. I think the Global Digital Compact is one of those very lovely, good documents that meets the checklist. It talks about all the things that you wanna hear. It talks about connectivity. It talks about human rights, even. It talks about expanding inclusion. But it remains a consensus document that it can be really very high level unless it cascades down to communities. It remains a Global Digital Compact for global optics. But I want to refer to something that is really concerning for us as Paradigm Initiative. Having done work on the African continent is that on the ground, there’s no real implementation of the GDC. or even acknowledgment that it’s such an important document with key commitments that have been made towards things that are critical to the African continent and specifically connectivity. And not just connectivity, but meaningful access to the internet, meaningful connectivity. So from our perspective, I think, through the work that we are doing, we’ve seen that definitely there’s a huge digital divide. And ITU has mentioned that, I think, from Africa’s population 38% are online, which means that there’s still a very huge group of people that are excluded from being on the internet and digital access basically is a problem. And that needs to be addressed. And the GDC has articulated what needs to happen. It’s also highlighted some of those gaps, gaps in availability, accessibility, as well as affordability, and also the importance of ensuring that at least there’s a digital skills strategy. And what we’re seeing on the ground is that that has not started being implemented. And last year at the 81st session, ordinary session of the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights as paradigm initiative, we’re able to convene an engagement with representatives from national human rights institutions on the African continent, as well as civil society organizations. And this was something new, basically, about the GDC. And that was, I think, a few months after its adoption. And there was a lack of knowledge. So capacity building, raising awareness are some of the critical things that need to happen like as soon as yesterday for relevant entities like your national human rights institutions, your civil society actors to be able to even also engage and hold governments accountable for what they committed to in the process of adopting the GDC itself. And I think one thing that I would also highlight is that through our work, we are able to bring digital literacy skills to communities and that’s how we are plugging in. with realizing what the GDC also speaks about. The good thing is that the GDC highlights the important role of different stakeholders, which is a very good thing in the context of multi-stakeholderism and how different stakeholders can plug in. And we’ve got digital literacy programs that we run, we’ve got our life legacy program that we run in different countries where we go into communities and build their capacity on how they can use digital tools and digital technologies. We also engage with policymakers around policy issues and how they can also be implementing what the GDC has said and what they’ve committed to as well at a global level. Last, I think last month, we also had an engagement. I’ll specifically speak about some of our work. I think Zambia was very pivotal in facilitating the GDC process and we were able to engage with the Zambian government, but at country level, engaging with civil society, they were still looking out to know more about how they can also get involved and how civil society can get involved. But the major thing that was coming out of that engagement is that there was a disconnect between what happens at global level when governments adopt these processes and what actually happens on the ground. There was an urgent need for that interface between governments and civil society on the ground to be able to engage on what governments agree to at global level and also just getting that awareness on the ground to the actors on the ground. So I think that’s something that we are also doing as Paradigm Initiative. We host the Digital Rights and Inclusion Forum and we’ve been also able to convene conversations around the Global Digital Compact as well to raise awareness. So I think for me, it’s awareness raising as well as building capacity of local actors to be able to engage and also ensure that there’s implementation of the GDC.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you so much and absolutely on the need to cascade down to communities and again. their civil society plays and must play a very important role also in their outreach to national authorities, to the local government to mobilise and to make sure that it’s not only in some documents but it’s reflected on the ground and something that I find it’s interesting that in all these frameworks that we have I think we must move from correlation to causation. It’s not enough to say, hey, we adopted this framework and this thing happened because the market forces or because of other external dynamics. We need to make sure that these frameworks that we agreed upon, they are able to move the needle. They’re only as good as they’re able to move the needle. Talking about moving the needle, a needle that was moved during the negotiation of the Global Digital Compact was child protection, the child dimension of the compact that was very weak, if I may, at the very beginning, but thanks to the advocacy of organisations like Five Rites, was strengthened and strengthened and is a key core part of the Global Digital Compact. And again, with this idea that it’s only as good as it’s able to cascade down to community, maybe, Leanda, you can elaborate on some of your activities and how they relate to the compact.

Leanda Barrington Leach: Thank you so much, Philippe, and hello, everyone. Very happy to be here today. Indeed, we were delighted by the results of the Global Digital Compact, and it wasn’t to be taken for granted, because as you say, at the beginning, there was not much. As usual, children generally are forgotten, especially not only, but especially when it comes to the digital space. Children have been forgotten really from the start. The digital space, the internet was not designed for children, and they continue to be largely ignored. Their voices, although they have a right to participation and to be heard in issues that affect them, and the digital environment certainly affects them. are very very largely absent. But there was a huge mobilization of civil society to ensure that children’s rights were central to the global digital compact and I would say that this is one area where unfortunately market forces do not make any difference and on the contrary there is a very strong commercial incentive to ignore children’s rights and to very very heavily exploit children on the services that they use online. So mobilizing and ensuring that we do have commitment from governments, national authorities, civil society, basically accountability of the tech sector is is absolutely critical. It is also really really critical to have global standards in this area that the services that children use and it’s a relatively narrow range of services we’re not talking about the entire digital environment but most children are using the same services around the world. It’s mostly social media, gaming, search and education technology in particular, although of course there are others, but these are the services that children around the world are using and spending huge amounts of time on. So having a global approach to basically regulate global companies and ensure that they go against their commercial incentives to very heavily exploit children and instead deliver something that is at a minimum rights respecting is really really critical and so the global digital compact is a very important step in this direction. I would just say that when it comes to kids inclusion, yes they do have a right indeed to participate and to be included and digital inclusion is very very important for them but it really is a question of included in what they must be included in a rights respecting digital environment and as I say an environment that has been designed with them in mind. the digital world will not be safe and children will not thrive in the digital environment unless they are taken into account when the systems that they use are designed and rolled out from the start. At the moment, as I said, it’s heavily commercial and effectively children are systematically exposed to risks and harms and this is indeed because all of those services that they are using basically are designed with three main aims which is, so the brief that designers are given are increased time spent on the service, increased reach and increased engagement and this results in very heavy persuasive behavioural manipulative design of these services which is leading to problems such as anxiety, depression, ADHD, body dysmorphia, self-harm, suicide, harassment and child sexual abuse just to name but a few and this has been going absolutely through the roof. Children, if you ask them, will tell you they expect to see something different. So we know the impact and the Global Digital Compact, you know, is a way of saying again that children’s rights need to be respected and I would say that the children’s piece actually had a little bit of a head start because there is already under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child the general comment number 25 which sets out exactly how this higher bar of rights for children applies in the digital environment. So that was already there a few years back, there was also the year before the Global Digital Compact, there was an UNGA, a General Assembly resolution, so member states again committing to taking this piece forward but in the end it doesn’t make any difference, as you said, unless it cascades down into real practical changes in the lived experience of children and that requires governments to go beyond nice policy statements and general commitments into policy. legislation and most difficultly having the political will to actually enforce against a sector which is very very powerful and invests an awful lot in lawyers and making enforcement incredibly difficult. So as I say this requires political will but we are getting there. I would just mention before my time runs out a few of the areas where advances have been made so the African Union now has a child online safety and empowerment policy it’s going up on the agenda in ASEAN as well. At the regional level also the Council of Europe adopted its treaty on AI framework treaty on AI which includes special provisions for children. At the European level the Digital Services Act now is the European Commission is finalizing guidelines specifically on children’s safety security and privacy in the digital environment. The AI Act also includes specific provisions for children. There are online safety legislation in the UK now being debated in Canada, Malaysia, there’s a lot of stuff in Australia and in particular there are age-appropriate design codes and technical standards that go with it in places like the UK but also on the table in well past already in Indonesia on the table in Argentina and elsewhere and there’s really good stuff in Brazil so with that I think I can stop. Yeah

Filippo Pierozzi: that’s a perfect transition. I was about to say that one of the governments that has been the most active in several areas of the Global Digital Compact is the Brazilian government. I’m thinking of President Lula’s commitment to AI governance. This is actually pre-date of course the Global Digital Compact and some of the priorities of the G20 presidency mirror very closely what is in the GDC. I’m thinking of information integrity, I’m thinking of the environmental dimension, I’m thinking again the AI governance dimension so maybe you can elaborate on how the G20 presidency relates to the Global Digital Compact and I know that Brazil is chairing the BRIC summit. So, maybe on this alignment between your international priorities and what’s the Global Digital Compact and what do you see? Where are we going from here?

Eugenio Garcia: Thank you. Glad to be here. Thank you for the invitation. I hope we can close all digital divides, not only computer divide for the panel next door. But this is when we talk about inclusivity, we should remember that one third of the world’s population is still offline. And by the way, protection of children and the youth is also a top priority for us in the digital domain. But I think you are familiar with the Brazil’s Internet Steering Committee, also known as CGI. We are celebrating 30 years. And some of you may also be familiar with the São Paulo Motor Stakeholder Guidelines adopted last year during the Net Mundial Plus 10. Because we believe that a motor stakeholder approach is the best way to ensure inclusion and diversity. But as a background to our discussion, I want to talk about the G20 BRICS and other initiatives. Because when we talk about the implementation of the GDC, what we need to face is a very challenging political situation, especially this year, with growing polarization, geopolitical tensions, ideological divide. Some people talk about a new tech Cold War. And maybe we should ask developing countries what their priorities are, if this is what they need or what they want. Because our approach, now talking about the G20, because we have the presidency of India, then Brazil last year, and this year is South Africa. So I think we are much on the same page, bringing this global south perspective to the G20. We have the Digital Economy Working Group, where we suggest four priorities. One is universal and meaningful connectivity, which is basic, since we still have a lot to do to achieve digital citizenship for all. And another priority was DPI, the Digital Public Infrastructure, including digital public services and allowing people to have access to digital tools and being able to participate in this digital environment. The third priority was information integrity, as Guilherme also mentioned. It was the first time information integrity was addressed within the G20. And the fourth priority was AI. In this case, we were highlighting the need for AI governance that is development-oriented, to reduce inequalities. So that’s a way that we address the problems of inclusion. And I think we were successful bringing these issues to the table, and we adopted a declaration in the city of Maceió. Maybe you can download this and have a look. The Maceió Declaration on the Digital Economy by the G20 last September. Now, talking about BRICS, we now have the presidency of BRICS with the summit of leaders next month in Rio de Janeiro. And we negotiated the first ever statement by the leaders of the BRICS on AI governance. And again, the same approach that we had within the G20, we also brought this to the BRICS. Just an example, the idea that access to AI technologies should be fair, actable, enabling and inclusive. So all countries, regardless of the stage of economic development, they have the right to benefit from and develop and use AI tools. We stress the need for international cooperation to facilitate access to AI technologies and critical components and to remove barriers to financial resources required for AI research and innovation. So this is, of course, G20 is different from the BRICS, but our approach is much the same, bringing these issues to the table. And then we have now COP30 coming. Climate change is, of course, a huge challenge. And we will host in Belém next November COP30, the first ever COP in the Amazon rainforest. And we like to say that we seek inclusivity for the most vulnerable groups, including indigenous peoples, because we are inviting people to come and see for themselves how life is in the Amazon. So please come. But also we know that it’s nearly impossible to have everyone physically there. So we are trying to see how we can have like a metaverse or something that will take this technology to help us make sure that stakeholders globally have the opportunity to engage. And of course, you know, the principle of nothing about us without us. So I think this is important to highlight. And everything is integrated in terms of the challenge that we face, including connectivity. in the Amazon region, because the most underserved region in Brazil is precisely the north, in the Amazon, in the remote areas. So I think it’s still a challenge, but that’s what we are trying to do. I think I will stop here.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you. You mentioned the challenging political situation. You mentioned, of course, connectivity. Without connectivity, we are not going anywhere. And there is a 2.6 billion that are still offline. And this is as much an issue of supply, but it’s more of an issue of demand. I think the data from ITU, and I don’t want to quote the wrong figure, but I think only 400 or 500 million people live in an area where there is no access to connectivity, but there is a demand issue. You mentioned information integrity being, for the first time, on the G20 agenda. In the political situation that we’re all living in, content moderation, the pick-up speed. A few years ago, we are seeing this trend being rolled back. And we know that when content moderation is not there, where policies are not there, the first to be damaged are vulnerable people. And refugees is one of the first categories that come to mind. So maybe coming back to information integrity, you might want to zoom in on your project and talk about that. Thank you.

Katie Drew: Thanks, everyone. Thank you, as well, for the opportunity to be here. And I just wanted to sort of say at the, maybe what seems to be the small detail level, but incredibly important level, was that at the digital global compact level, refugees are included as an identified group. And this is vitally important for us, because just like children, for a long time, they’ve been almost like a silent group when we’ve been talking about digital. And very often, this is because the digital divide that we all talk about is really pronounced for people experiencing. forced displacement. And so if you think about maybe where are the largest refugee hosting settlements on the African continent for a long time, they were in places where connectivity wasn’t, or we saw sort of patchy internet that really didn’t necessarily enable them to sort of access meaningfully connectivity services. So that’s great. We’re really pleased to have seen sort of the the focus or, you know, the inclusion of refugees. And that’s a really important part of sort of how we as UNHCR, you know, are sort of leveraging this as an opportunity to really try and, you know, get the importance of refugee inclusion in these conversations on the agenda. And, you know, thanks again to sort of Paradigm, we were able to talk about refugee inclusion and information integrity at the Digital Rights and Inclusion Forum. Just recently, we had the Protection of Civilians Week in New York, sponsored by Brazil, allowing us to bring the issues to the table. I think concretely, it’s really worth mentioning, as you say, where we see sort of the polarization of conversations. You know, there is a sense of sort of othering that is definitely being exacerbated. We see scapegoating of, you know, non-foreign nationals in many, many contexts across the globe. And on the receiving end of this are very often refugees and forcibly displaced people. And the level of toxicity and hate and, you know, we see that online in some contexts, and those who were in a previous panel, you know, the panel members that we had were able to talk directly about how in South Africa, online hate towards foreigners, including refugees, resulted in real life harm, you know, and this caused, you know, destruction to property, but also resulted in death, ultimately. And so that’s something that definitely needs to be addressed. But, you know, it’s not an easy solution to fix. And I think that as we’re able to sort of much more sort of focus on some of the, I guess, conditions or enabling factors that are sort of part of the compact, is really looking at how the importance of this multi-stakeholder approach has been absolutely critical to us as well. So at a concrete level within UNHCR, we’ve really tried to make an effort to deliver on sort of the commitments that we see within the compact, but really want to sort of think about how we can leverage, maybe unique to us partners, you know, I mean, Paradigm for example, we’ve only started just to sort of really think about how we can work with people who are in sort of working on digital rights, for example, and that’s something that has been a new partnership for us, and I think that’s really important that we start to try and explore those digital rights actors. We’re really also taking that nothing about us without us approach, and looking at how we can work with communities to try and sort of create content that will counter these toxic narratives, that will really work to try and sort of promote, you know, refugee voices and stories that are hopefully looking to sort of counter, you know, toxicity and think about inclusion that are really, really important as well. And so we’ve actually had the opportunity to be able to implement a number of pilot projects across diverse contexts and with multiple partners, including the private sector, government, digital rights, civil society and refugee led organisations as well. And through this process, and hopefully to, you know, start to address that, how do you take it into practice? We’ve developed an information integrity toolkit that pulls together a number of sort of practical steps that people can, you know, take tools that people can use to try and address information risks in forced displacement contexts. This is a constantly evolving, you know, situation and we know that we don’t actually have you know, the one-size-fits-all silver bullet solution to this, but I would really urge sort of partners to sort of think about how they can collaborate with us, how they can use these tools, because this is a challenge that is a sort of whole-of-society issue and it’s going to take multiple partners to address. So I’m very happy to share the link to the toolkit afterwards. If you have tools that you also want to share with us, please do. And the beauty of this toolkit, just to sort of say one final point of it, is I think it really speaks to the spirit of the compact as well. It draws on tools that civil society have developed, it draws on tools that our sister agencies have developed as well, has strong links to, you know, tools that media development agencies have also created, and I think that it’s really important that we realise

Filippo Pierozzi: we’re not in this alone. So thank you. Thank you so much, Katie. And using IGF, that is the best platform we have for multi-stakeholder conversation. I know I have a second round of questions for my panellists, but I would invite right now, if you have any observation or question, you can just, you can see some mic over there, we’ll be able to take two or three observations or a question and then we’ll go back to our panellists. I would kind of invite you to introduce yourself and to be brief if possible. Hello, can you hear me? Okay, thank you. This is

Mohammad Abdul Haque Anu: Mohammed Abdullah Qonu from Bangladesh. I’m from Bangladesh Internet Governance Forum. I’m a Secretary General. I have three observations. As the Global Digital Compact moves from agreement to implementation, how can we ensure that the voice of grassroots and national level multi-stakeholder initiatives, especially from the Global South, are meaningfully included in shaping the governance mechanism and accountability? Another observation, what role do national IGF and local actors play in global commitment with local initiative? And third observation, big Rohingya refugee live in Bangladesh territory. They are not allowed to have mobile connection. Thank you.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you. If we may go to my left, that is, to the right, please.

Wolfgang Kleinwachter: Thank you. My name is Wolfgang Kleinwächter. I’m a retired professor from the University of Aarhus. We speak about the implementation of the Global Digital Compact. And I think the representative from UNESCO was very wise to say that the GDC itself is an element in the process which started already years ago and has seen a lot of iterations, you know. We had the WSIS documents, then we had a number of commissions, we had the roadmap of the Secretary General, and now we have the Global Compact, and it was a permanent improvement. And so the Global Digital Compact is the next step in the right direction, which goes to the 2030s. So my point is, you should be very careful not to isolate the implementation of the Global Digital Compact from the other processes, but to include them. And with WSIS Plus 20, we have a great opportunity, and it would be good if ODAT would, you know, strengthen this close cooperation or integration between WSIS Plus 20 and the GDC. You mentioned also the Working Group on Technology, Emerging Technologies, and you mentioned a number of organizations. We have UNGIS. UNGIS is a good instrument already, so there is no need to add something more, but what is needed is to strengthen the multi-stakeholder engagement, and the proposal made by the Swiss government to add… a multi-stakeholder advisory group to UNGIS would be a good idea and if this would get the support from others this would be a good step in the right direction. Thank you.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you, Wolfgang.

Jaqueline Trevisan Pigatto: Thanks, Filippo. My name is Jacqueline Pegato. I’m with Data Privacy Brazil, Civil Society. I was actually going to say the same point that Professor Kleinwachter about the WSIS plus 20. I would like to hear thoughts of the panel on the integration of the GDC with the WSIS action lines and also if there are conversations or if you envision the establishment of some targets and metrics for the implementation so we can follow in also as a accountability mechanism. Thank you.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you and the last intervention, please.

Adel Maged: My name is Adel Magid. I am a judge at the Egyptian Court of Cassation in Egypt and I am honorary professor of law at Durham University. I am going to complete on the same person who is sitting here on the modalities to implement. This is what I can see. This is one problem or this is the main focus of this workshop and I heard some voices that were saying that it is a non-binding instrument. So when you say it is a non-binding, it is, yeah, of course it is a non-binding instrument but you are underestimating of its value, its power. We have the same problem with a global compact on safe and orderly and regular migration. It is the same issue, compact, soft law, but when you aim to implement the provision of this compact or even reinforce it, just refer to existing international binding instruments. For example, for this hate speech issue, the Security Council had issue many resolution on a speech, so you can enforce the articles in this compact observation through the security. When it comes about cybercrimes against children, for example, you refer to the new instrument that has been issued last year, last December, by the UN, the UN Convention Against Cybercrimes. It covered many issues concerning human rights, cybercrimes, so this is a modality that you can use to implement and enforce the provision of this compact. Thank you.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you so much. I will turn to the speaker and maybe to connect what we heard last from the professor with the first intervention from Mohamed. It was about how we can ensure the voices of multi-stakeholders are meaningfully included into this, and in my understanding this goes beyond law and legislation. There is something that law and legislation can deliver. There are some of the objectives of different compacts or different non-binding instruments and general assembly resolution that cannot be achieved with legislation alone, but I don’t know what to take on this multi-stakeholder dimension and how we can better implement maybe relying on part on some other initiative legislation that is out there.

Guilherme Canela De Souza: I can comment very briefly on different things that were mentioned. On the grassroots, I didn’t mention in my initial remarks because I didn’t want to steal the thunder from Eugenio, but since he didn’t, I will say it. One of the things we also did together with Brazil under the G20 is this global initiative on information integrity and climate change, and while I’m mentioning this, one essential component of this initiative is actually to support grassroots initiatives to understand the problem of information integrity and climate change, and for those grassroots initiatives to produce knowledge on that. And this example is very interesting because it’s the very concrete idea of implementing, for example, the information integrity components of the Global Digital Compact, connecting with climate change, connecting with access to data in the digital platforms and so on. So if you are interested, actually we have an open call for proposals until 6th of July. Just Google it, Global Information Integrity, and you can apply for this. And then, of course, on the question of the justice, I mean, I think this is our permanent challenge, how we actually include the duty bearers in this conversation. This is particularly fundamental, the judges, the regulators, and so on. And we connect what is essentially policy, multilateral policy document that is the Global Digital Compact with the wealth of international legislation and international jurisprudence of the human rights courts. Because it’s not only about the ICCPR, that are, of course, fundamental, but it’s also how the international courts have interpreted the implementation of this. But again, this in the digital environment connects very well with one of the, as I mentioned in the beginning, one of the key provisions of the Global Digital Compact that is capacity building. Because, I mean, as you know, you are a professor, many of your colleagues in different, and judges, and prosecutors in different countries, they still have several lack of knowledge of how they can implement the agreements their own countries have already ratified in the international arena in the national context. And in this case of the digital environment, this is absolutely central for protecting children’s issues, for protecting migrants’ issues, and so on and so forth. So I will stop here with these two comments, Filippo.

Filippo Pierozzi: And since it’s often governments and the UN that we opine about a lot of acronyms I would like to hear from. and from Leanda on how do you think that this multi-stakeholder model can be strengthened? How can we help what you’re doing on the ground? Thank you so much.

Thobekile Matimbe: I’ll start by maybe perhaps responding on how to include voices, to be aware of the processes that are happening on the ground and there should be meaningful consultations, engagements with different stakeholders at country level to feed into you know global submissions by states that then feed into what is adopted as you know as accountability frameworks at global level and that is something that is very important and I think national IGFs as well I think the conversation would largely look at strengthening as well their capacity to be able to be those relevant platforms where there is multi-stakeholder engagements around critical issues especially around you know meaningful connectivity as we are speaking about inclusion in this context. I also highlight as well that it is important when we’re looking at as well the handshake I would like to call it you know the synergy when we’re looking at this processes and I mean global processes and looking at the global digital compact and voices that it is important to to highlight the importance of sustaining the inclusive multi-stakeholder model so that it remains intact and it’s even more strengthened. Supporting as well the distinct function of the Internet Governance Forum and its role as a platform for assessing implementation of the GDC itself and I think that’s something that is important to to echo as well affirming as well that was this process and ensuring that there’s promotion of its ability to actually give a voice to the affected communities is something that is very important and I would I think maybe yeah just reflect on that at this point.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you and do you want to comment?

Leanda Barrington Leach: Yes thank you so much so multi-stakeholder approach yes obviously I said before first of all the children need to be at the table they have a right and they are generally not. But then of course in order to make things that work you need you know a variety of expertise and stakeholders at the table. So you know since we started working on children’s rights in the digital environment more than a decade ago at Five Rights we have prided ourselves on developing practical tools in collaboration with a variety of stakeholders, notably engineers. So most recently for example this is the children and AI design code which was developed over over more than a year with AI experts, engineers and child rights experts and of course and of course children. So the tools are there developed in a multi-stakeholder approach but then I want to say specifically that in terms of implementation of the Global Digital Compact when it comes to children meaningful implementation by the required stakeholders is highly problematic when there are not the resources. There is a massive massive imbalance of power and resources between in this case the tech sector where in the Global Digital Compact it says very clearly as it does in the General Comment 25 as it does also in the UNGA resolution that this is a sector that in order to deliver to children for children absolutely has to be regulated right. So the bit I’m talking about is the regulation and this regulation we have tried self-regulation and it has not worked. The time has come for much more robust regulation and for that what we face is civil society and regulators who are way out of their depth. There is very little knowledge, there is very very little capacity and as I mentioned before there is a huge amount of resources on the other side. So capacity building for regulators and civil society is urgently urgently needed if this is to be a meaningful process where we end up with results that deliver for children and humanity.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you. Wolfgang, the professor asked a specific question on a UN mechanism and who better than Eugenio that is also a UN veteran to answer the question if you have thoughts on how we can best reconcile GDC and WSIS.

Eugenio Garcia: First I want to thank Guilherme for being so kind to bring this issue to our discussion. Indeed during the G20 summits last November we launched the global initiative on information integrity and climate change and this is a partnership between the government of Brazil UNESCO and the UN Secretary specifically the Department of Global Communications. I will have to give you if you are interested in more details about this when we finish this panel but yes I will try to address some of the questions because the implementation of the GDC is already ongoing right now this week there are discussions in New York of course they have the working group on data governance they have already started their work but for the AI track which is very important for the GDC they are in at the UN discussing the third draft of the terms of reference and modalities for both the site international independent scientific panel on AI and the global dialogue on AI governance so these are same package and of course negotiations they are not easy as we know but right now there is a procedure that’s a science procedure that will end tomorrow and we’ll see if some delegations will break the silence or perhaps if they are not happy with the outcome. As it is, but the panel, the scientific panel now, the proposal is to have 40 members. So our friend from Bangladesh mentioned about the Global South and how we can secure inclusion because there is a limitation that for these experts to be chosen, have a limitation of maximum two per nationality. So we can’t have the same country, for example, with five, six people in the same panel. So this I think would allow some sort of both gender balance and geographical balance and some diversity, but of course we need to make sure also that expertise is taken into account for these members to be appointed. But this is ongoing, and the question about how we can incorporate the GDC and WSIS plus 20 review process, that’s something that is challenging because what if we had a joint implementation roadmap? That would be perhaps ideal, but since the train has left the station already for the GDC, so some people are sceptical that we will be able to have an alignment of both processes. I believe, my personal view, that we still have time to do this, and of course we will continue. This is an ongoing conversation. Now we have the WSIS Forum and the AI for Good Summit next month in Geneva, and we have the zero draft for the WSIS process. We had the elements paper, but was very cautious in terms of proposals. So we see how it goes, but of course it’s something that we need to address and to have a successful outcome.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you, I want to make sure also Katie has her word, you can pick your question or I think there was a very interesting point.

Katie Drew: Thank you, so maybe I’ll start with responding to the question that came from the representative from Bangladesh and this builds out to sort of a bigger challenge that I think is an opportunity under the Global Digital Compact. So you’re quite right that many refugee populations face sort of legal and regulatory barriers to being able to access the internet or mobile phone services and it’s not unique to one context and so if we have the right level of evidence we’re able to then sort of use that to build advocacy. So for example under the umbrella of the Connectivity for Refugees program that we have within UNHCR we are able to look at, it’s under the title Displaced and Disconnected, we were able to identify where there are sort of legal barriers to refugees being able to sort of access mobile phones and there has been sort of some cases where we’ve been able to use that to be able to sort of advocate for improved access and maybe that’s from sort of know your customer regulations etc and identification. Not in every context but I think it’s really important. Going back to the point of how can we use the legal frameworks that are already in place and the mechanisms at the national and global or regional level, I think the challenge is that we actually, when it comes to particularly information integrity and the impact that it has on refugees, it’s not a very well resourced and researched area. And this is why I think collectively and working through this multi-stakeholder approach, academia are really critical and a critical voice that we need to invite to the room to make sure that we’re shining the light on some of these challenges. And so one of the things that we really try to do as well is identify where the legal frameworks actually do provide protection for forced migration. displace people. So one of the pieces of work that we’ve been working on with DLA Piper, who’ve been supporting us pro bono, is to identify exactly which articles in the Digital Services Act will help protect refugees. And looking is there an extraterritorial application for the Digital Services Act, if we see incitement to violence by content created in an EU member state about refugees, for example, in, you know, extraterritorial, how does that sort of, you know, provide protection and support? Now, this is an entirely new area for UNHCR to be sort of exploring and investigating. And I think that that’s when it’s important. I’m mindful of the time. I’ll just wrap up. I think that that’s where it’s really important that we actually do engage legal minds who work in the technology sector, who have been advancing maybe some of these sort of areas that aren’t our normal sort of, I guess, partners that we would partnership with. Okay, over.

Filippo Pierozzi: Thank you so much. Now, I wanted to have this last 40 seconds or so just to thank you all for being here. And I hope this was a useful conversation. If you have questions, you can find us around at IGF. We heard questions on what do we think about this? And as you heard from the Secretary General, I think panel like this are yet again, another concrete demonstration of why IGF should be strengthened, why IGF has value and should continue. And to those who ask what’s our position? You heard it from the Secretary General yesterday. Thank you so much for joining us today. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out and have a good afternoon or good evening.

Agreement points

Implementation of GDC should start immediately without waiting for additional frameworks

Speakers

– Guilherme Canela De Souza
– Filippo Pierozzi

Arguments

Implementation should start immediately without waiting for additional frameworks

The Global Digital Compact was adopted by consensus and implementation has already begun across multiple UN initiatives

Summary

Both speakers emphasize that the Global Digital Compact is ready for implementation now and should not wait for additional bureaucratic processes or committees. The framework exists and action should be taken immediately.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development

Capacity building is essential for effective implementation

Speakers

– Guilherme Canela De Souza
– Thobekile Matimbe
– Leanda Barrington Leach

Arguments

Capacity building is essential for public servants on digital transformation and AI

Awareness raising and capacity building for local actors is urgently needed

Civil society and regulators lack capacity to effectively regulate tech sector

Summary

All three speakers agree that capacity building is crucial – whether for public servants, local actors, or regulators – to effectively implement digital governance frameworks and protect rights.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Multi-stakeholder approach is necessary for inclusive digital governance

Speakers

– Eugenio Garcia
– Thobekile Matimbe
– Wolfgang Kleinwachter
– Leanda Barrington Leach

Arguments

Multi-stakeholder approach is the best way to ensure inclusion and diversity

Meaningful consultations with stakeholders at country level should feed into global submissions

Multi-stakeholder advisory group should be added to UNGIS to strengthen engagement

Children have a right to participation and must be included at the table

Summary

There is strong consensus that effective digital governance requires meaningful participation from all stakeholders, including civil society, private sector, government, and affected communities like children.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development | Human rights

Digital divide remains a significant challenge requiring urgent attention

Speakers

– Thobekile Matimbe
– Eugenio Garcia
– Filippo Pierozzi
– Katie Drew

Arguments

38% of Africa’s population is online, leaving a huge group excluded from digital access

One third of the world’s population is still offline

2.6 billion people are still offline, with demand being a bigger issue than supply

Legal barriers to refugee connectivity can be addressed through advocacy using evidence

Summary

All speakers acknowledge that connectivity and digital access remain major barriers to inclusion, affecting billions of people globally, with particular challenges for vulnerable populations.

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Human rights

Vulnerable populations face disproportionate harm from digital exclusion and online risks

Speakers

– Leanda Barrington Leach
– Katie Drew
– Thobekile Matimbe

Arguments

Current digital services cause anxiety, depression, self-harm, and other serious harms to children

Online hate towards refugees results in real-life harm including death

There’s a disconnect between global commitments and ground-level implementation in Africa

Summary

Speakers agree that vulnerable groups including children, refugees, and marginalized communities in the Global South face the greatest risks from both digital exclusion and harmful online content.

Topics

Human rights | Cybersecurity | Development

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize that the GDC should build on and strengthen existing work rather than create new bureaucratic layers, and that international frameworks must demonstrate concrete impact rather than just exist on paper.

Speakers

– Guilherme Canela De Souza
– Filippo Pierozzi

Arguments

The GDC builds on existing commitments rather than creating entirely new obligations

Frameworks are only valuable if they can move the needle and create causation, not just correlation

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development

Both speakers highlight the gap between high-level international commitments and actual implementation on the ground, particularly affecting vulnerable populations in developing countries.

Speakers

– Thobekile Matimbe
– Katie Drew

Arguments

There’s a disconnect between global commitments and ground-level implementation in Africa

Legal barriers to refugee connectivity can be addressed through advocacy using evidence

Topics

Development | Human rights | Legal and regulatory

Both speakers advocate for moving beyond voluntary approaches to more structured, evidence-based interventions to protect vulnerable populations from digital harms.

Speakers

– Leanda Barrington Leach
– Katie Drew

Arguments

Self-regulation has failed and robust regulation of tech sector is urgently needed

Information integrity toolkit provides practical tools for addressing risks in displacement contexts

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Unexpected consensus

Information integrity as a priority area requiring immediate attention

Speakers

– Guilherme Canela De Souza
– Eugenio Garcia
– Katie Drew

Arguments

UNESCO guidelines on digital platform governance balance information integrity with freedom of expression

Information integrity was addressed for the first time within the G20 framework

Online hate towards refugees results in real-life harm including death

Explanation

The strong consensus on information integrity as a critical issue is somewhat unexpected given the traditional focus on connectivity and access in digital development discussions. The agreement spans UN agencies, government representatives, and humanitarian organizations, showing broad recognition that misinformation and online hate have real-world consequences.

Topics

Sociocultural | Human rights | Legal and regulatory

Need for robust regulation rather than self-regulation of tech sector

Speakers

– Leanda Barrington Leach
– Adel Maged

Arguments

Self-regulation has failed and robust regulation of tech sector is urgently needed

Non-binding instruments can be enforced through existing binding international law

Explanation

The consensus between a children’s rights advocate and a judge on the need for stronger regulatory approaches represents an unexpected alignment between civil society and legal perspectives, moving beyond traditional calls for voluntary compliance.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Overall assessment

Summary

There is strong consensus among speakers on the need for immediate implementation of the Global Digital Compact, the importance of capacity building, multi-stakeholder engagement, addressing the digital divide, and protecting vulnerable populations. Speakers also agree on the urgency of information integrity issues and the need for more robust regulatory approaches.

Consensus level

High level of consensus with complementary perspectives rather than conflicting viewpoints. The agreement spans different sectors (UN agencies, government, civil society, judiciary) and regions, suggesting broad-based support for the implementation approach. This consensus provides a strong foundation for coordinated action on GDC implementation, though speakers acknowledge significant challenges in translating high-level commitments into ground-level impact.

Different viewpoints

Approach to regulation versus self-regulation in tech sector

Speakers

– Leanda Barrington Leach
– Eugenio Garcia

Arguments

Self-regulation has failed and robust regulation of tech sector is urgently needed

Multi-stakeholder approach is the best way to ensure inclusion and diversity

Summary

Leanda advocates for robust government regulation of tech companies, stating self-regulation has failed, while Eugenio emphasizes multi-stakeholder approaches as the best solution, suggesting a more collaborative rather than regulatory approach

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Urgency and readiness of implementation

Speakers

– Guilherme Canela De Souza
– Thobekile Matimbe

Arguments

Implementation should start immediately without waiting for additional frameworks

There’s a disconnect between global commitments and ground-level implementation in Africa

Summary

Guilherme argues the GDC is ready for immediate implementation, while Thobekile points out the reality that there’s no actual implementation happening on the ground, suggesting the readiness Guilherme describes doesn’t match ground reality

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Unexpected differences

Assessment of current implementation readiness

Speakers

– Guilherme Canela De Souza
– Thobekile Matimbe

Arguments

Implementation should start immediately without waiting for additional frameworks

There’s a disconnect between global commitments and ground-level implementation in Africa

Explanation

This disagreement is unexpected because both speakers are from organizations working on digital inclusion, yet they have fundamentally different assessments of whether the GDC is ready for implementation. Guilherme from UNESCO sees readiness while Thobekile from civil society sees a complete disconnect

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Overall assessment

Summary

The main areas of disagreement center on implementation approaches (regulation vs. multi-stakeholder collaboration), assessment of current readiness for implementation, and the effectiveness of existing frameworks versus need for new mechanisms

Disagreement level

Moderate disagreement with significant implications – while speakers share common goals around digital inclusion and protection of vulnerable populations, their different perspectives on implementation methods could lead to conflicting policy approaches and resource allocation decisions

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize that the GDC should build on and strengthen existing work rather than create new bureaucratic layers, and that international frameworks must demonstrate concrete impact rather than just exist on paper.

Speakers

– Guilherme Canela De Souza
– Filippo Pierozzi

Arguments

The GDC builds on existing commitments rather than creating entirely new obligations

Frameworks are only valuable if they can move the needle and create causation, not just correlation

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development

Both speakers highlight the gap between high-level international commitments and actual implementation on the ground, particularly affecting vulnerable populations in developing countries.

Speakers

– Thobekile Matimbe
– Katie Drew

Arguments

There’s a disconnect between global commitments and ground-level implementation in Africa

Legal barriers to refugee connectivity can be addressed through advocacy using evidence

Topics

Development | Human rights | Legal and regulatory

Both speakers advocate for moving beyond voluntary approaches to more structured, evidence-based interventions to protect vulnerable populations from digital harms.

Speakers

– Leanda Barrington Leach
– Katie Drew

Arguments

Self-regulation has failed and robust regulation of tech sector is urgently needed

Information integrity toolkit provides practical tools for addressing risks in displacement contexts

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Key takeaways

The Global Digital Compact (GDC) should be implemented immediately without waiting for additional frameworks, as it builds on existing commitments rather than creating entirely new obligations

There is a significant disconnect between high-level global commitments and ground-level implementation, particularly in Africa where only 38% of the population is online

Multi-stakeholder engagement is essential for successful implementation, requiring meaningful inclusion of grassroots voices, civil society, children, refugees, and Global South perspectives

Children’s rights in digital spaces require urgent attention through robust regulation of tech companies, as self-regulation has failed and commercial incentives favor exploitation over protection

Information integrity has emerged as a critical priority, being addressed for the first time in G20 frameworks and requiring coordinated responses to combat online hate that leads to real-world harm

Capacity building is fundamental for successful implementation, particularly for public servants, judges, regulators, and civil society organizations who lack technical knowledge and resources

Digital inclusion must focus on meaningful connectivity rather than just access, addressing legal and regulatory barriers that prevent vulnerable populations like refugees from accessing digital services

The GDC should be integrated with existing processes like WSIS Plus 20 rather than operating in isolation to maximize effectiveness and avoid duplication

Resolutions and action items

UNESCO to continue training public servants through alliance of national schools of public administration on GDC implementation

Brazil to host COP30 in Amazon with innovative connectivity solutions including potential metaverse participation

UNHCR to share information integrity toolkit and collaborate with partners on addressing misinformation affecting refugees

Global initiative on information integrity and climate change accepting proposals until July 6th for grassroots projects

UN negotiations ongoing for AI scientific panel (40 members) and global dialogue on AI governance with geographical and gender balance requirements

Paradigm Initiative to continue digital literacy programs and policy engagement across African countries

Five Rights to advance age-appropriate design codes and technical standards in multiple countries

Strengthen national IGFs as platforms for multi-stakeholder engagement on GDC implementation

Unresolved issues

How to effectively bridge the gap between global policy commitments and local implementation, particularly in underserved regions

Whether GDC and WSIS Plus 20 processes can be successfully aligned given that ‘the train has left the station’ for GDC

How to address the massive power and resource imbalance between civil society/regulators and tech companies

Specific mechanisms for ensuring meaningful participation of children and vulnerable populations in digital governance

How to overcome legal and regulatory barriers preventing refugees from accessing connectivity in various countries

Establishing concrete targets and metrics for GDC accountability and progress measurement

Addressing the demand-side challenges of digital connectivity beyond infrastructure availability

How to sustain funding and political will for long-term capacity building initiatives

Suggested compromises

Developing joint implementation roadmap between GDC and WSIS Plus 20 despite timing challenges

Using existing binding international legal instruments to enforce non-binding GDC provisions

Leveraging multi-stakeholder partnerships to pool resources and expertise for implementation

Focusing on practical tools and guidelines that can be immediately implemented while longer-term frameworks develop

Balancing information integrity measures with protection of freedom of expression and access to information

Combining global standards with locally-adapted implementation approaches

Adding multi-stakeholder advisory group to existing UNGIS mechanism rather than creating new structures

We all, politicians at least, according to him in Latin America, we have the same syndrome. That is the syndrome of Adam. We think the world started with ourselves. And I’m saying this because the global digital compact beauty is not about exactly proposing something entirely new… It’s the huge and interesting exercise of looking across the border in the UN system, but also in the concrete policies in our 190 plus member states, and trying to come with a comprehensive framework saying, those are the key areas that we agree that are urgent for the immediate future.

Speaker

Guilherme Canela De Souza

Reason

This metaphor brilliantly captures a fundamental challenge in international policy-making – the tendency to reinvent rather than build upon existing frameworks. It reframes the GDC not as revolutionary but as evolutionary, which is both more realistic and actionable.

Impact

This comment set the tone for the entire discussion by establishing that implementation should focus on coordination and coherence rather than creating new structures. It influenced subsequent speakers to emphasize building on existing initiatives rather than starting from scratch.

It remains a Global Digital Compact for global optics. But I want to refer to something that is really concerning for us as Paradigm Initiative. Having done work on the African continent is that on the ground, there’s no real implementation of the GDC or even acknowledgment that it’s such an important document with key commitments that have been made towards things that are critical to the African continent and specifically connectivity.

Speaker

Thobekile Matimbe

Reason

This comment cuts through diplomatic language to expose a critical gap between high-level commitments and ground-level reality. The phrase ‘global optics’ is particularly powerful in highlighting how international frameworks can become performative rather than transformative.

Impact

This shifted the conversation from celebrating the GDC’s adoption to confronting implementation challenges. It prompted Filippo to emphasize the need to move ‘from correlation to causation’ and influenced other speakers to focus more concretely on practical implementation barriers.

Children have been forgotten really from the start. The digital space, the internet was not designed for children, and they continue to be largely ignored… there is a very strong commercial incentive to ignore children’s rights and to very very heavily exploit children on the services that they use online.

Speaker

Leanda Barrington Leach

Reason

This comment exposes a fundamental design flaw in digital infrastructure and business models. It connects structural issues (design) with economic incentives (exploitation) to explain why children remain vulnerable despite policy frameworks.

Impact

This comment deepened the discussion by introducing the concept that inclusion isn’t just about access but about designing systems with vulnerable populations in mind from the start. It influenced the conversation to consider power imbalances and the need for regulation rather than just voluntary compliance.

Maybe we should ask developing countries what their priorities are, if this is what they need or what they want. Because our approach, now talking about the G20, because we have the presidency of India, then Brazil last year, and this year is South Africa. So I think we are much on the same page, bringing this global south perspective to the G20.

Speaker

Eugenio Garcia

Reason

This comment challenges the assumption that global frameworks automatically reflect global priorities. It suggests that the current geopolitical moment, with Global South countries leading major forums, creates an opportunity to reshape digital governance priorities.

Impact

This comment introduced a geopolitical dimension to the discussion and validated the importance of centering Global South perspectives. It connected the GDC to broader power dynamics in international relations and influenced the conversation to consider how different regional priorities might shape implementation.

We see scapegoating of, you know, non-foreign nationals in many, many contexts across the globe. And on the receiving end of this are very often refugees and forcibly displaced people. And the level of toxicity and hate and, you know, we see that online in some contexts… online hate towards foreigners, including refugees, resulted in real life harm, you know, and this caused, you know, destruction to property, but also resulted in death, ultimately.

Speaker

Katie Drew

Reason

This comment connects abstract policy discussions about information integrity to concrete life-and-death consequences. It demonstrates how digital exclusion and online harm intersect with physical violence against vulnerable populations.

Impact

This comment grounded the entire discussion in urgent human consequences, moving beyond technical implementation to moral imperatives. It reinforced the need for the multi-stakeholder approach and practical tools that other speakers had mentioned.

We speak about the implementation of the Global Digital Compact… you should be very careful not to isolate the implementation of the Global Digital Compact from the other processes, but to include them. And with WSIS Plus 20, we have a great opportunity, and it would be good if ODAT would, you know, strengthen this close cooperation or integration between WSIS Plus 20 and the GDC.

Speaker

Wolfgang Kleinwachter

Reason

This intervention from the audience introduced a crucial governance question about how to avoid fragmentation in digital governance processes. It highlighted the risk of creating parallel rather than complementary implementation tracks.

Impact

This comment prompted the final portion of the discussion to focus on institutional coordination and the relationship between different UN processes. It influenced speakers to address practical questions about how different frameworks can work together rather than compete for attention and resources.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by moving it from abstract policy celebration to concrete implementation challenges. Guilherme’s ‘syndrome of Adam’ metaphor established a framework for thinking about coordination rather than innovation. Thobekile’s critique of ‘global optics’ forced honest confrontation with implementation gaps. Leanda’s analysis of structural design flaws introduced the need for systemic rather than superficial changes. Eugenio’s emphasis on Global South priorities added geopolitical context, while Katie’s examples of life-and-death consequences provided moral urgency. Wolfgang’s intervention about process coordination brought practical governance questions to the fore. Together, these comments transformed what could have been a congratulatory discussion about the GDC’s adoption into a nuanced examination of power dynamics, implementation barriers, and the gap between international commitments and local realities. The discussion evolved from ‘what we achieved’ to ‘how we make it work’ – a much more valuable conversation for practitioners and policymakers.

How can we ensure that the voice of grassroots and national level multi-stakeholder initiatives, especially from the Global South, are meaningfully included in shaping the governance mechanism and accountability?

Speaker

Mohammad Abdul Haque Anu

Explanation

This addresses the critical need for inclusive participation from underrepresented regions in global digital governance structures

What role do national IGF and local actors play in global commitment with local initiative?

Speaker

Mohammad Abdul Haque Anu

Explanation

This explores the connection between national-level internet governance forums and global commitments, seeking to understand how local actors can contribute to global initiatives

How can we establish targets and metrics for the implementation of the Global Digital Compact so we can follow as an accountability mechanism?

Speaker

Jaqueline Trevisan Pigatto

Explanation

This addresses the need for measurable outcomes and accountability mechanisms to track progress on GDC implementation

How can the Global Digital Compact be integrated with the WSIS action lines and WSIS Plus 20 process?

Speaker

Wolfgang Kleinwachter and Jaqueline Trevisan Pigatto

Explanation

This explores the coordination between existing digital governance frameworks to avoid duplication and ensure coherent implementation

How can legal and regulatory barriers preventing refugees from accessing internet and mobile phone services be addressed?

Speaker

Mohammad Abdul Haque Anu and Katie Drew

Explanation

This addresses specific connectivity challenges faced by displaced populations and the need for policy solutions

What is the extraterritorial application of the Digital Services Act for protecting refugees from harmful content created in EU member states?

Speaker

Katie Drew

Explanation

This explores how regional legislation can provide protection for vulnerable populations beyond territorial boundaries

How can capacity building for regulators and civil society be urgently addressed to enable meaningful implementation of child protection measures?

Speaker

Leanda Barrington Leach

Explanation

This addresses the resource and knowledge imbalance between civil society/regulators and the tech sector in implementing child protection

How can we move from correlation to causation in measuring the impact of global frameworks like the GDC?

Speaker

Filippo Pierozzi

Explanation

This addresses the need to demonstrate that adopted frameworks actually drive concrete changes rather than just coinciding with market-driven developments

How can we develop better research and evidence on the impact of information integrity issues on refugees?

Speaker

Katie Drew

Explanation

This identifies a gap in academic research needed to support advocacy and policy development for protecting displaced populations