WSIS at 20: successes, failures and future expectations | IGF 2023 Open Forum #100

Shamika Sirimanne

The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) aims to create a people-centred, inclusive, and development-oriented information society. However, this vision remains unfulfilled, as evidenced by the stark disparities in connectivity across different regions and countries. While 95% of the world’s population has access to mobile broadband networks, only 36% of people in Least Developed Countries (LDCs) are connected. This disparity highlights the existence of a digital divide, where disadvantaged populations are left behind in the global information society.

Furthermore, the digital divide is not only limited to LDCs but also extends to rural areas within developed countries. Massive rural-urban divides in connectivity exist, creating further barriers to accessing information and participating in the digital economy. This divide has become a serious development issue, as those who lack access to digital technologies struggle to reap the benefits of innovation and technological advancements.

The WSIS process and digital transformation are described as a massive technological revolution of our time. This transformation poses both opportunities and challenges for individuals, governments, and societies as a whole. Navigating the emerging world of digital technologies can be daunting, as it is largely uncharted territory. While advancements in technology have the potential to drive economic growth and foster innovation, they also bring risks, such as cyber threats and privacy concerns.

Recognising the complexity of the digital sphere, the need for multistakeholder cooperation and a One UN approach is emphasised. The WSIS highlights the importance of enhancing partnerships and collaboration among different stakeholders, including governments, private sector entities, civil society organisations, and international institutions. It is through this multilateral cooperation that the challenges and opportunities of the digital age can be effectively addressed.

Additionally, data collection is seen as crucial for fact-based reporting and decision-making. The importance of accurately collecting data through questionnaires is emphasised, as it allows for evidence-based analysis and monitoring progress towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). By capturing and reporting relevant data, policymakers and stakeholders can make informed decisions and take targeted actions to bridge the digital divide and promote an inclusive information society.

In conclusion, the WSIS vision of an inclusive and development-oriented information society remains relevant and unfulfilled. The digital divide persists, with significant disparities in connectivity between different regions and populations. Navigating the digital transformation brings both opportunities and challenges, necessitating multistakeholder cooperation and a One UN approach. The collection of accurate and comprehensive data is essential for effective decision-making and monitoring progress towards achieving the SDGs.

Audience

The extended summary provides a comprehensive overview of the main points discussed in the given text. It highlights the importance of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) process and the role of youth in it. The youth voice was emphasised, with advocates calling for greater representation and inclusion in the WSIS process. They also stressed the need for initiatives that improve access to education and empower young people. This underlines the importance of involving youth in shaping policies and decisions related to the digital world.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) was recognised for its potential in advancing human development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It was noted that AI can enhance education and healthcare access, help address global challenges like climate change and poverty, and improve accessibility for persons with disabilities through assistive technologies. However, concerns were raised about potential threats to data privacy, the creation of surveillance systems, and the emergence of new forms of discrimination and exclusion. It was argued that AI should be developed and employed in a manner that upholds human rights and follows ethical guidelines.

The alignment of the WSIS with various UN processes was discussed, highlighting the importance of digital cooperation. The WSIS was seen as setting the foundation for digital cooperation and being aligned with different UN processes, including the WSIS Forum, special initiatives, and prizes. This emphasises the collaborative efforts needed between stakeholders to achieve common goals in the digital realm.

The impact of digital transformation was examined, noting its success in terms of technological advancements but also its shortcomings in terms of knowledge dissemination. Issues such as disinformation, misinformation, hate speech, and fake news were identified as challenges of digital transformation. The monopolisation of digital platforms in the media landscape was also highlighted, with significant effects on community publishing and media diversity.

The need for periodic reviews of the WSIS process was stressed, as well as the importance of acknowledging progress and evolution in Internet governance. It was argued that the presence of 176 indicators in the SDGs serves as Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and distinguishes them from the Millennium Development Goals. The inclusion of low-literate individuals in the digital space was advocated, highlighting the current lack of internet tools and platforms designed for those who do not know how to read or write.

Overall, the speakers expressed a mix of positive and negative sentiments, advocating for responsible development and utilisation of AI, digital inclusion, and closer alignment with the SDGs. Collaboration, periodic reviews, and a multi-stakeholder and human-centric approach were seen as crucial in achieving sustainable digital development. The text provides valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities associated with the WSIS process and the role of digital technologies in advancing societal and development goals.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves

The WSIS Plus 20 review at CSTD takes a progressive and forward-thinking approach, focusing not only on the present but also on planning for the future. This review is in alignment with SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure. The General Assembly adopted a resolution for a high-level meeting to be held in 2025, known as the WSIS Plus 20 review. To facilitate this process, the ECOSOC adopted a resolution requesting the CSTD to organize substantive discussions on the progress made in the implementation of the outcomes of the WSIS over the past 20 years. Furthermore, CSTD members have adopted a roadmap to guide their work on the WSIS Plus 20 review.

Stakeholder engagement with open consultations and a survey questionnaire is a vital part of the WSIS Plus 20 review. The CSTD’s Secretariat plans to conduct a survey questionnaire from late 2023 until late 2024. Additionally, open consultations will be held at national, regional, and international levels, involving various stakeholders such as multilateral agencies, the private sector, the technical community, national governments, civil society, and academia. This inclusive approach ensures that the review takes into account a wide range of perspectives and experiences in shaping the future of the WSIS.

The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) plays a significant role in the WSIS process and is an outcome of it. The CSTD is grateful to the IGF for providing a platform to launch its open multi-stakeholder consultation at the 18th IGF. This collaboration allows for meaningful discussions and engagement with different stakeholders to inform the WSIS Plus 20 review.

The WSIS forum not only aligns with several UN processes but also highlights the role of digital transformation in achieving sustainable development goals. There are examples of the alignment of the WSIS forum, special initiatives, and WSIS prizes with various UN processes. Additionally, the UN promotes the role of digital technology in healthy ageing, further emphasising the importance of digital transformation for overall development.

Given the positive progress made in the WSIS process, Cedric Vashvalt should continue the discussion on digital policies and transformation. Although no specific supporting facts or arguments are provided in the data, it suggests that Cedric Vashvalt possesses valuable insights and perspectives in this area.

In conclusion, the WSIS Plus 20 review at CSTD takes a forward-thinking approach by focusing on future planning. Stakeholder engagement through open consultations and a survey questionnaire plays a crucial role in shaping the review’s outcomes. The IGF provides a platform for open multi-stakeholder consultation, and the WSIS forum aligns with various UN processes, emphasising the role of digital transformation in achieving sustainable development goals. Cedric Vashvalt should continue the discussion on digital policies and transformation as he is seen as an important contributor in this domain.

Speaker 1

The Government of Japan has reiterated its commitment to the multistakeholder approach in internet governance during the International Governance Forum (IGF) held in Kyoto in 2023. This event saw a remarkable registration of over 8,000 participants, indicating widespread interest in global internet governance issues. Mr. Yasunori Ueno delivered a speech on behalf of Mr. Yoshi Ida, affirming Japan’s dedication to the multistakeholder approach, which involves collaborating with various stakeholders, including governments, civil society, and the private sector, to shape internet policies.

The principle of a people-centred, inclusive, and development-oriented internet society has remained unchanged since 2005. Despite the immense changes and advancements in the internet landscape over the years, the focus on placing people at the centre of internet policies, ensuring inclusivity, and fostering development, continues to be paramount.

The significance of a free, open, and global internet was emphasised. It was highlighted that such an internet is vital for socio-economic development, as it provides opportunities for innovation, entrepreneurship, and knowledge-sharing. Additionally, it helps in debunking misinformation by promoting the free flow of accurate and reliable information. It also enhances cybersecurity, ensuring that individuals and organizations can conduct activities online with confidence and trust.

As the G7 presidency, Japan is playing a leading role in discussions on AI governance through the Hiroshima AI process. This initiative recognizes the importance of establishing principles and guidelines to govern the ethical and responsible use of artificial intelligence, considering its potential impact on various sectors of society.

Japan views the IGF Kyoto as a crucial opportunity, especially in anticipation of the upcoming WSIS plus 20 review in 2025. The WSIS plus 20 review refers to the United Nations’ World Summit on the Information Society, a series of gatherings since 2003 aimed at bridging the digital divide and harnessing the potential of information and communication technologies for sustainable development. By participating in the IGF Kyoto, Japan seeks to contribute to the discussions and preparations for the WSIS plus 20 review, ensuring that the outcomes align with the goals and principles of the multistakeholder approach and advance partnerships for global development.

In conclusion, the Government of Japan’s reaffirmation of commitment to the multistakeholder approach in internet governance, the enduring principles of a people-centred internet society, the importance of a free and global internet, and its active involvement in AI governance discussions demonstrate Japan’s dedication to promoting inclusive, secure, and responsible internet governance practices. Through its participation in the IGF Kyoto and its leadership role in the Hiroshima AI process, Japan aims to play a significant role in shaping the future of internet governance and contributing to global partnerships for sustainable development.

Kamel Saadaoui

The analysis of the speakers’ discussions highlighted several important points regarding internet governance and the role of international institutions. Firstly, it was noted that, despite significant technological advancements since the Tunis Agenda and Outcomes in 2005, these agreements continue to hold relevance in promoting an open, resilient, unfragmented, and inclusive internet. The Tunis Agenda endorses the importance of human rights and cultural diversity in the digital space. The speakers pointed out that while platforms like social media, artificial intelligence, clouds, and blockchains have emerged since the Tunis Agenda, its recommendations have maintained their importance and applicability.

Furthermore, the analysis identified improvements in institutions like the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) with regards to transparency, accountability, and support for international domain names. However, it was suggested that further improvements could be made, particularly in increasing the government’s participation in ICANN beyond an advisory level.

Another significant point raised during the discussions was the need to reconsider the framework of enhanced cooperation. The analysis highlighted that developing countries often struggle to engage with major platform providers on an equal-to-equal basis, especially in areas such as taxation and local rules for personal data protection. Additionally, emerging issues such as cyber threats, misuse of the internet for money laundering, and human trafficking require cooperative efforts among nations. The speakers proposed that a reconsideration of the framework of enhanced cooperation is necessary to effectively address these challenges.

The analysis also emphasized the importance of monitoring the potential digital gap between regions and social groups within each country. It was suggested that local digital problems should be addressed locally, and each country should actively monitor and work towards minimizing disparities in internet access and usage.

Lastly, the analysis highlighted the significance of supporting institutions involved in internet governance, such as ICANN, ITU, World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), World Trade Organization (WTO), and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). These institutions play a crucial role in ensuring a stable internet and should be supported to foster a stable and inclusive digital environment for all nations.

In conclusion, the analysis of the speakers’ discussions identified the continued relevance of the Tunis Agenda and Outcomes, improvements in institutions like ICANN and ITU, the need for reconsideration of the framework of enhanced cooperation, the importance of monitoring the digital gap, and the necessity of supporting institutions involved in internet governance. These observations provide insights into the ongoing efforts and challenges in shaping an open, inclusive, and secure internet.

anita gurumurthy

The analysis provides a comprehensive overview of digital cooperation and the challenges posed by the data and AI economies. The first argument highlights that the promise of collective digital potential has not been realised. It notes that algorithms today are largely opaque and indiscernible to the public. This lack of transparency creates concerns about accountability and the power wielded by AI systems. Furthermore, the analysis suggests that this algorithmic society is also a society of fragmentation, as AI systems often lead to polarisation and echo chambers, hindering the creation of a cohesive and inclusive digital space.

The second argument focuses on the neocolonial dynamics embedded within the data and AI economy. The analysis points out how trade forums are being misused for discussions on data flows, with potential negative consequences for privacy and data protection. Additionally, it highlights how data for development initiatives are frequently extractive, benefiting powerful global entities at the expense of local communities and economies. Moreover, the weaponization of intellectual property regimes by big tech companies further exacerbates the imbalance of power, rendering the situation even more concerning.

In response to these challenges, the analysis proposes a four-pronged strategy for digital cooperation. The first prong advocates for initiating a consensus for a global digital human rights constitutionalism. This would entail establishing a set of principles and standards that safeguard individuals’ rights in the digital sphere, addressing issues such as privacy, freedom of expression, and equitable access to technology.

The second prong focuses on better governance of global data public goods. The analysis argues for the need to develop robust frameworks and mechanisms that ensure responsible data management, protection, and sharing. This would involve addressing issues of data ownership, control, and fairness to promote more equitable data ecosystems.

The third prong of the proposed strategy calls for the mobilisation of public financing to galvanise digital innovation ecosystems. The analysis recognises that public investment is vital to foster innovation, particularly in areas where the private sector may not prioritise development due to market limitations or social impact considerations. By channelling public funding strategically, the aim is to nurture digital entrepreneurship and create a conducive environment for sustainable technological advancements.

Finally, the fourth prong suggests the internationalisation of internet governance. The analysis argues that internet governance should be a collective effort involving multiple stakeholders on a global scale. This would facilitate a more inclusive decision-making process and ensure that diverse perspectives are represented. By internationalising internet governance, the aim is to create a more balanced and democratic digital ecosystem that respects the interests of all nations and individuals.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the complexity and urgency of addressing the challenges posed by the data and AI economies. It emphasises the need for greater transparency, accountability, and collaboration in digital cooperation. The proposed four-pronged strategy provides a comprehensive framework to navigate these challenges, with recommendations ranging from the protection of digital human rights to the internationalisation of internet governance. By implementing such strategies, it is hoped that the potential of the digital era can be harnessed for the benefit of all, fostering innovation, inclusivity, and equitable development.

Pearse O’donohue

The analysis of the discussions reveals several key points from the different speakers. Firstly, the multi-stakeholder model is viewed positively as an effective instrument for internet governance. The speakers acknowledge that the model and the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) have played a vital role in the unprecedented success of the internet. They highlight the importance of a cooperative approach, as demonstrated by the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in making effective decisions for the governance of the internet.

Secondly, human rights are seen as crucial to maintaining an open, free, and secure online space. The EU strongly supports a proactive approach towards human-centric digitalization, emphasizing the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. They advocate for human rights to be the foundation of an open and secure online environment. The EU AI Act is highlighted as a significant step towards placing the impact of AI technologies at the centre of digitalization efforts.

Furthermore, the importance of bridging digital divides and creating a more inclusive digital future is emphasized. The EU and its member states are committed to deploying digital networks and infrastructures worldwide, focusing on underserved regions, countries, and populations. This commitment aligns with SDG 9, which aims to promote industry, innovation, and infrastructure. The EU’s efforts aim to ensure that everyone has equal access to the benefits of the digital world.

Additionally, the analysis reveals opposition to the centralization of control over the internet. One speaker explicitly stated their stance against the centralization of control, but no further supporting facts were provided for this argument.

Lastly, strengthening the role of the IGF is seen as crucial in fostering an inclusive, open, and sustainable digital environment. The EU believes that it is critical for the IGF to evolve into an even more impactful and inclusive model. This aligns with the goal of creating a digital environment that encompasses diverse perspectives and promotes cooperation among stakeholders.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the significance of the multi-stakeholder model for effective internet governance. Human rights are deemed essential for an open and secure online space, and the EU is committed to bridging digital divides and creating a more inclusive digital future. Strengthening the role of the IGF is seen as crucial in fostering an inclusive, open, and sustainable digital environment. Opposition to the centralization of control over the internet is also stated.

Isabelle Lois

The analysis highlights several key points made by the speakers regarding various aspects of internet governance. Firstly, inclusive, transparent, and multi-stakeholder processes are deemed to be of utmost importance in effectively addressing the digital governance challenges at hand. The past Internet Governance Forums (IGFs) have successfully applied such processes, demonstrating their effectiveness in fostering collaboration and achieving meaningful outcomes.

Furthermore, trust-building between stakeholders is acknowledged as a crucial element in realizing the vision of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). It is widely believed that establishing and nurturing trust among different actors involved in internet governance is essential for creating an environment of cooperation, enabling collective efforts towards achieving common goals.

The analysis also emphasizes the need to empower individuals and centre the governance of emerging technologies. The speakers argue that putting individuals at the forefront and ensuring their equal participation in shaping the governance of emerging technologies is vital. This approach aims to maximize the societal benefits of these technologies while mitigating potential risks and ensuring that they serve the needs and interests of all.

Furthermore, it is asserted that participation in IGFs must exhibit consistency, inclusivity, and representation from all regions of the world. This will contribute to a diverse range of perspectives and ensure that the global internet governance dialogue reflects the varied needs and challenges faced by different regions. The analysis suggests that the Committee on Science and Technology for Development (CSCD) could seek synergies with national and regional IGF initiatives to enhance inclusivity and improve regional representation in the overall IGF process.

In addition, the analysis highlights the importance of expanding internet access to the remaining 2.6 billion individuals who are currently not connected. It is noted that while significant progress has been made over the past two decades, with internet access increasing from 6% to approximately 70% of the global population, concerted efforts are still required to bridge the digital divide and ensure universal connectivity.

Lastly, gender inclusion in artificial intelligence (AI) and its governance is recognized as a critical aspect. The analysis suggests adopting a gender lens and valuing women’s perspectives in all aspects of internet governance and decision-making related to AI. This approach aims to address existing gender disparities and biases, ensuring that AI technologies and policies are developed in a way that promotes gender equality and inclusivity.

In conclusion, the analysis underscores the significance of inclusive, transparent, and multi-stakeholder processes in addressing digital governance issues. Trust-building, empowering individuals, regional representation, universal internet access, and gender inclusion in AI governance are key focus areas identified by the speakers. These points highlight the collective efforts required to ensure that internet governance initiatives are equitable, efficient, and responsive to the evolving needs and challenges of the digital age.

Robert Opp

According to one speaker, ICT (Information and Communication Technology) is considered an absolute mega trend and plays a crucial role in driving global changes. It is seen as a super mega trend that has a positive impact on various aspects of society. The speaker highlights the significant role of ICT in shaping industries, innovation, and infrastructure, aligning with SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure.

On the other hand, another speaker raises concerns about the urgency of addressing ICT-related issues. They emphasize that the pace of global changes is accelerating, necessitating immediate action. Undoubtedly, ICT advancements have brought about rapid changes in various domains, such as technology and communication. However, the negative sentiment expressed by this speaker suggests that there are potential challenges and risks associated with these changes. They stress the need to address these issues promptly, emphasizing the importance of SDG 13: Climate Action.

Both speakers agree on the critical role of UN partnerships and multi-stakeholder groups. They acknowledge that the collaborative efforts of these entities are essential in tackling the complex challenges posed by ICT-related issues. These partnerships and groups provide a platform for various stakeholders to come together, share expertise, and develop effective strategies. The positive sentiment expressed towards these partnerships highlights their significance in addressing not only ICT-related concerns but also broader sustainable development goals. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals is particularly relevant in this context.

The analysis reveals that despite the positive outlook towards ICT’s contributions to global changes, there is an underlying sense of urgency and a recognition of potential risks. It is essential to strike a balance between harnessing the benefits of ICT while mitigating any negative implications. The importance of collaboration, as indicated by the positive sentiment towards UN partnerships and multi-stakeholder groups, further underscores the need for collective action in navigating the challenges presented by ICT advancements.

Overall, the extended summary highlights the key points made by the speakers, explores their arguments and supporting evidence, and emphasizes the significance of UN partnerships and multi-stakeholder groups. It reflects the contrasting perspectives surrounding ICT as a mega trend and emphasizes the urgency in addressing associated issues.

Prateek Sibal

UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, plays a crucial role in addressing digital challenges through the principles of multistakeholderism and cooperation. They co-facilitate action lines, demonstrating their commitment to involving multiple stakeholders in finding effective solutions to digital challenges. This approach is essential in promoting partnerships and collaborations to achieve sustainable development goals, particularly SDG 17: Partnership for the goals.

Furthermore, UNESCO actively works towards assessing internet environments in about 45 countries. Their approach is based on a rights-based, open, accessible, and multistakeholder approach. This demonstrates their dedication to ensuring that internet access is not only available but also respects human rights and fosters an inclusive digital society. However, despite UNESCO’s efforts, there have been approximately 1,200 internet shutdowns globally between 2016 and 2023. This highlights the ongoing challenges faced in ensuring universal access to the internet and the need for continued efforts to address these issues.

In addition to addressing connectivity challenges, UNESCO promotes open access to information. They celebrate Access to Information Day on the 28th of September, emphasizing the importance of transparency and access to information in fostering sustainable development. This commitment aligns with SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, which emphasizes the importance of promoting accountable and inclusive societies.

Another significant challenge in the digital age is the prevalence of disinformation and misinformation. UNESCO recognizes this and has developed programs to support the upscaling of civil society organizations and fact-checking mechanisms. This effort aims to enhance media and information literacy, which is crucial in combating the spread of false information. By supporting these initiatives, UNESCO contributes to achieving SDG 16 and building resilient societies.

Moreover, UNESCO implements standard-setting instruments to facilitate open science and ethical considerations regarding artificial intelligence. They have various standards in place, including recommendations on open science, the ethics of AI, and open educational resources. This commitment to setting global standards promotes the responsible use of technology and ensures that scientific and educational resources are freely available to all.

In conclusion, UNESCO plays a significant role in addressing digital challenges through multistakeholderism, cooperation, and various initiatives. Despite the persistent challenges, such as internet shutdowns and disinformation, UNESCO’s efforts to assess internet environments, promote open access to information, enhance media literacy, and implement standard-setting instruments demonstrate their commitment to building a more inclusive and sustainable digital society. Their work aligns with the UN’s sustainable development goals, emphasizing the importance of partnerships, transparency, and ethical considerations in harnessing the potential of digital technologies for the benefit of all.

Anna Margaretha (anriette) Esterhuysen

The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) has received high praise for its impactful process in facilitating participation and producing unique outcome documents. These documents are notable for incorporating the perspectives and involvement of non-state actors, reflecting a comprehensive and inclusive approach. The WSIS documents strike a balance between broad overarching principles and specific subject areas, providing a holistic yet detailed framework.

There is a strong call to continue building upon the WSIS process, advocating for inclusivity and increased civil society involvement at various levels. Enabling civil society to shape debates at the grassroots level is seen as crucial in bringing about significant change. It is proposed that WSIS provides space for civil society involvement, and collaboration within the U.N. system is needed to facilitate greater engagement.

Lessons from WSIS are valuable in addressing macro issues such as public financing and digital public infrastructure. The issue of insufficient public financing is identified, and considering digital public infrastructure in the light of WSIS lessons can provide innovative solutions. By drawing upon WSIS experiences, these issues can be effectively tackled.

The WSIS documents stand out by focusing on people-centered development. They emphasize human rights, open innovation, and open source as important factors in creating an enabling environment. This approach is demonstrated in efforts to bring education to remote areas and promote trade justice and small-scale agriculture. Emphasizing the needs and rights of individuals and communities, rather than solely focusing on technological advancements, is crucial for achieving fair and inclusive development.

In conclusion, the WSIS process is praised for facilitating participation and generating unique outcome documents that incorporate the views of various stakeholders. Continuing to build on the process with a focus on inclusivity and civil society involvement is recommended. WSIS lessons are also valuable in addressing macro challenges such as public financing and digital public infrastructure. The people-centered approach advocated by WSIS is essential for promoting fair and inclusive development.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
big letter, so I have to put my glasses. It’s horrible. No, come on, I’m kidding, of course. So, welcome to this first open consultation on the WSIS Plus 20. I don’t think that a lot of people here in this IGF, they know that this is the first open consultation for the future of the WSIS, but nevertheless, we are doing that during the IGF, and I’m sure that we will get more involvement for the different stakeholders throughout the next two years. So, excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. A warmest welcome to the launch of the open consultation of the United Nations Commission on Science and Technology for Development at the CSTD. On the WSIS Plus 20 review as an open forum event on the Internet Governance Forum 2023. So, I am Ana Cristina Desneves, and I’m chair of the CSTD. And today, I’m moderating this event entitled WSIS at 20, Successes, Failures, and Future Expectations, a partnership between the CSTD, the ITU, UNESCO, and UNDEP, all key actors of the WSIS. As you know, the WSIS vision is to establish, and now I’m going to quote some Geneva Action Plan text, people-centered, inclusive, and development-oriented information society for enhancing the potential of information communication technologies for sustainable development. So, we have different questions. To what extent and how is the vision of a people-centered, inclusive, and development-oriented information society evolved over the past 20 years since WSIS? We are still nowadays talking about people-centered, human-centric, inclusiveness, and development. In 2003, we were talking about information society. Nowadays, we are talking about digital. We have to understand what we mean by that, but we know that from the Tunis Agenda of 2005, this Internet Governance Forum was set up, and we had all these problems already, and diagnosis, and we were trying to make the world a better place to live. How will ongoing trends and emerging technologies, nowadays particularly artificial intelligence, but we have so many other emerging technologies as quantum technologies, the 3D printing, et cetera. So, how will ongoing trends and emerging technologies impact progress towards human development and the sustainable development goals? Moreover, how can these trends enable or hinder the realization of the WSIS vision? What measures should be taken to advance international cooperation, including in terms of governance to leverage emerging technologies for sustainable development in economic, social, environmental, and cultural dimensions? These are some of the questions that we invite you to consider today. If I put them simply, the questions could be how much progress have we made towards that vision? What challenges remain in the way ahead? Those are also issues that CSED has been addressing in implementation of its ECOSOC and the General Assembly mandate to review the implementation of the WSIS outcomes, including through annual reports to the ECOSOC and to the General Assembly, and the contribution of input to the WSIS Plus 10 review back to the General Assembly in 2015. And as some of you may remember, the General Assembly adopted a resolution on the 16th of December, 2015, and in that resolution called for a high-level meeting to be held in 2025 to review the overall implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on Information Society known as WSIS Plus 20 review. For the WSIS Plus 20 review, the ECOSOC, so the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, adopted a resolution in June, 2023 that requests the CSED to collect inputs from member states, all facilitators, and other stakeholders, and to organize during its upcoming session in 2024, March, 2024, and in its 28th session the year after, in 2025, substantive discussions on the progress made in implementation of the outcomes of the WSIS during the past 20 years, and to report thereon through the ECOSOC, then to the General Assembly. The CSED members adopted a roadmap at its annual session last March, 2023, to guide the CSED’s work on WSIS Plus 10, sorry, 20 review. Here is a snapshot of the roadmap. So you can see the roadmap. And thanks, Eva, for sharing the slide. So you can see on that slide that March, 2023, the CSEDs, so it was determined that CSEDs has a major role on the WSIS Plus 20 review, and that the CSED has to produce a synthesis report, which first draft will be presented to the CSED in March, 2024, and the final draft will be presented on the 28th CSED in 2025. The CSED outcomes will be submitted via ECOSOC to the General Assembly’s WSIS review in 2025. So this is open consultation that will be held at national, regional, and international level. And with multilateral agencies, private sector, technical community, national governments, civil society, academia. So we have these two years ahead of us until a resolution will be adopted in UNGA, the United Nations General Assembly in 2025. I wish to underline that the WSIS Plus 20 review at CSTD will take a progressive and a prospective or forward-looking approach by not only looking at the present, but more importantly, looking to the future. Equally, I want to emphasize that an integral part of the CSTD’s WSIS Plus 20 review is the engagement of all stakeholders in open consultations and in the survey questionnaire that the CSTD Secretariat will conduct from late 2023 until late 2024. The CSTD is grateful to the Internet Governance Forum for giving the space to the CSTD to launch its open multi-stakeholder consultation at the 18th IGF in this ancient and beautiful city of Kyoto. Internet governance is an important component of the WSIS process, and of course, the IGF itself is an outcome of WSIS. But it’s important to remember that the WSIS process covers all aspects of digitalization, including the issues concerned with aspects of development and the environment that are discussed in the WSIS Forum and elsewhere. The objective of today’s event is to enable a candid and open dialogue drawing on the collective wisdom, perspectives, and experiences of the various stakeholders. The insights and recommendations stemming from today’s interactions will undoubtedly contribute to the synthesis report to be prepared by the CSTD Secretariat, which is intending to shape substantive discussions at the CSTD’s WSIS Plus 20 review sessions as mandated by ECOSOC. Our session is structured as follows. Ms. Siriman, Head of the CSTD Secretariat and the Director of the Division on Technology and Logistics, UNCTAD, will make opening remarks. And Mr. Ueno, on behalf of Mr. Yoshi Lida, Deputy Director General for G7, G20 Relations, Government of Japan, will deliver a keynote speech. He will be followed by six discussion starters who will share with us their views and insights. Thereafter, I will open the floor to both in-person attendees and remote participants for a freestyle roundtable discussions under my moderation, including judicious time management. So I would like to remind remote participants that they should request the floor through the hand-raising feature on the Zoom platform. Ladies and gentlemen, now it is my great pleasure to invite Ms. Shamika Siriman, Director of the Division on Technology and Logistics of UNCTAD and Head of the CSTD Secretariat, to make opening remarks. Mrs. Siriman, the floor is yours.

Shamika Sirimanne:
Good afternoon and good morning and good evening to all of you joining from online. So let me take the opportunity to join the chair of the CSTD in welcoming you to this CSTD Open Consultation on the WSIS Plus 20 Review. And I think we all agree that the WSIS vision of a people-centered, inclusive, and development-oriented information society remains as valid as ever and also quite unfulfilled. So the journey has not ended. And in fact, it is quite concerned. We have enormous of our concerns when we know that the 95% of the world’s population live today within range of a mobile broadband network. In LDCs, just 36% of their people are connected and these are concerns. And women remain digitally marginalized in many of the world’s poorer countries and there’s a massive rural-urban divides and there are many multifaceted divides. And I think we also have seen that these divides have become quite serious development divide. It’s not just a, it’s not no longer a digital divide. It has transformed into a development divide and we experienced that during COVID-19 times. Those who has access to internet and manage to live and manage to work and manage to have education online and buy stuff online and those who are not connected basically were locked out of the functioning world and that’s the concern. So as our CSDD chair, Anna, as you said, that today the CSDD is opening a consultation process and we want your input about the lessons of the 20 years of WSIS implementation. And from that lessons, we also need to understand from your own viewpoints, how are we going to navigate this emerging world? You know, we are going through a massive digital technological revolution and this is probably the technological revolution of our lifetimes. And so how do we, we are walking into uncharted territory as we have heard in many, many, many rooms of in the IGF. So we want to hear from you about the new themes, the threats, the opportunities that need responses from the UN system. We also ask you as WSIS stakeholders and you ushered WSIS to tell us about ways to ensure that the WSIS process contributes to preserving and improving multilateral cooperation in the digital sphere. I want to also want to say that as the CSDD Secretariat, we are working very closely with other key WSIS players and our great partners like the ITU, UNESCO, UNDP and the regional commissions in this review. And I am very happy to have all of us coming together because we will all do our own consultations because we all have our own lines, action lines, but we will all merge, we will all use the inputs into the WSIS process as we prepare the material for the General Assembly. So I’m very happy to let you know that this is done with the one UN kind of approach. And I’m also very happy to say as Anna said earlier, this is truly a multi-stakeholder consultation and that’s what we need. We need, we cannot, it’s not just the governments can navigate this emerging world, it’s not just the international organizations, academia, it’s a civil society, the private sector, we all need to be at the table and we all need to put our voices. So here I like to now showcase the timeline of the various WSIS processes over the years showing the different agencies contribution. Maybe you may not be able to see it very well, but we will share this document with you because it shows the processes that’s going towards, how are we gonna all converge? So we will not walk on parallel roads. And I also want to emphasize this example of this interagency collaboration. We have jointly circulated a questionnaire to seek stakeholder inputs for the WSIS plus 20 review and please help us circulate it among your networks. And it is extremely important that we get proper data, otherwise it’s all going to be anecdotal, somebody said this and somebody said that. So we really are looking to collect data and have a report which is fact-based. So please help us, I think we spend a lot of time. Yeah, it’s a simple questionnaire, but we spend time to make sure that we get good data. So please also do that. So let me end here and I look forward to a productive discussion. And just as Anna said, this is just the beginning. We will work with our regional commissions, we will have regional consultations and we will have consultations wherever you open us room for. So thank you.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Your very insightful and interesting remarks, reflections on WSIS. And I was this opportunity for everyone to read or to revisit the Geneva principles, the Geneva action plan and the Tunis agenda. Maybe it’s good for everybody to reread these documents. Because from three days of IGF, it seems like some of us never read those documents. And now that we are discussing WSIS plus 20, it’s very important to have those in mind. Now I’m pleased to invite Mr. Weno that will read the keynote speech on behalf of Mr. Yoshi Ida, Deputy Director General for G7, G20 relations, government of Japan. So to deliver Mr. Ida’s keynote speech, please.

Speaker 1:
Thank you, Chair. Hello, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Yasunori Ueno from Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan. My boss, Mr. Ida, was planning to deliver a keynote speech here, but he could not attend this session because of urgent business. So please allow me to deliver his speech on behalf of him. Firstly, I would like to say welcome to Kyoto. Welcome to IGF 2023. I appreciated both physical participants and the remote participants. I heard the number of registration for IGF Kyoto is now over 8,000. We as host country is very glad with this figure. Also, this number show… how important IGF is. Government of Japan has strongly committed multistakeholder approach for internet governance. In this IGF, it is important to respect the efforts of the past 17 times of this event and to build on new efforts. From this perspective, we actively participate in leadership panels. We have contributed from the standpoints of the host country. As the concept note of this session points out, the current digital society has greatly changed since 2005, but the idea of people-centered, inclusive and development-oriented information society has not changed. For this purpose, a free, open and global internet is important. In this context, we should continue making our effort to bring about socio-economic development so that no one left behind from human-centered innovation. Also, to enhance the reliability of internet, it is important to address the issue of mis-information and cyber security. It is also important for the international community to develop digital infrastructure and address the issue of digital divide. The idea of people-centered, inclusive and development-oriented information society is the same for AI governance, which is currently an important issue for international society. Currently, the government of Japan, as the G7 presidency, is leading discussion on AI governance through a process named as Hiroshima AI process. We are planning to advance this Hiroshima AI process in cooperation with the United Nations. With the WSIS plus 20 review coming up in 2025, I believe the IGF Kyoto this year is a very important opportunity. We are looking forward to sharing and exchanging opinions and ideas between various stakeholders. Thank you very much.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Thank you, Mr. Ueno, very much for sharing Mr. Ide’s deep thoughts and for setting the scene of our discussions today. And congratulations for the 8,000 registrations. That is huge. Nobody can say that is not huge and powerful. Wow. Congratulations again. So next, I will invite the five discussing starters to share their views and insights with us. Each speaker has four or five minutes at most, and then it will be open for everyone in this room to… in this room and online, of course, to make a statement or to say whatever they want. So I will start with Miss Isabel Lois. Lois? Lois. Yes, the Spanish family. Senior policy advisor at the Swiss Federal Office of Communications. So I think that you are going to reply to a question, which is what needs to be done in international cooperation for a better achievement of the WSIS vision. Isn’t that right? Please. Thank you.

Isabelle Lois:
Thank you, Anna. So it’s been two decades since the first World Summit on Information Society took place in Geneva. And I would like to start with acknowledging the tremendous progress that has been achieved since then. I mean, inclusive, transparent, and multi-stakeholder processes have proven to be essential in addressing the complex issues of digital governance. And we have learned that cooperation, exchange of information, and joint identification of the relevant cross-sectorial issues are key in this process, as well as fostering strong partnerships between all the stakeholders. Building trust between stakeholders and taking action against prejudical is crucial. As we look forward to the future and the WSIS Plus 20 review, our task and the task is clear. We need to strengthen the process that empowers individuals, regardless of their gender, age, or origin. We need to center the governance of emerging technologies that lead to a sustainable development in economic, social, and environmental dimension. As a government representative, I have to remind myself and my fellow counterparts that by actively listening and taking into account the needs and knowledge of the civil society, private sector, technical communities, academia, and more, we can create an inclusive environment that thrives on constructive criticism and uses the experience that we may not have. And that is what I’ve been seeing in the past IGFs and here again in the successful Kyoto edition. The WSIS has been one of the most inclusive processes to date, and the outcome reflects it. There is the sense of community and a commitment of all that are involved that demonstrates the power of the democratic multi-stakeholder participation. However, we must ensure that this participation remains consistent, inclusive, and representative of all regions of the world. For instance, the CSCD could seek synergies with the wide and rich network of national and regional IGF initiatives, as it was mentioned before. And whilst we’ll made significant progress, challenges still lie ahead. Two decades ago, only 6% of the world population had access to the internet. Today, that number stands at about 70%. And the principles laid down in 2003 remain valid, especially regarding the multi-stakeholder approach. But we must build upon the knowledge and experience we have gained since and focus on connecting the remaining 2.6 billion individuals who are still disconnected, and then ensuring that the connection is meaningful, and then effectively govern together based on those common principles. This can only be achieved through collaboration and inclusion. The VISIS Plus 20 review comes at a particular time, as AI and its governance is at the forefront of many minds. In this process, it is essential to adapt as well a gender lens. Women’s voices and perspective must be included and valued in all aspects of internet governance. By doing so, it will create a human-centered, free, and secure digital world that benefits everyone. This is the perspective that many organizations have now been taking very seriously. And just as an example, we can take the ITU or UNESCO, and we should do so as well within the CSTD process and the VISIS Plus 20 review. Switzerland firmly believes that inclusive, multi-stakeholder, and cross-silos cooperation are prerequisites for achieving our vision of a digital world that prioritizes humanity, freedom, security, and inclusivity. Let us continue to work together, breaking down the silos, and ensuring that the benefits of the internet are accessible to all. Thank you, and I look forward to the discussion.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Thank you very much, Isabel Flores. The next discussant will be Mr. Kamel Saadoui, Chief of Minister’s Office of Ministry of Communication Technologies from Tunisia. And he’s online, right? Yes. Yes. Good morning, everyone. Good morning. Good morning from Tunisia. I think that you are going to talk a little bit about, to regard the international multi-stakeholder discussion, how has the international multi-stakeholder evolved since VISIS? And more importantly, how should it evolve in the future? Mr. Kamel Saadoui, I will give you four or five minutes, please. Thank you.

Kamel Saadaoui:
Thank you, Chair. Good morning from Tunisia. It’s 7.30 in the morning. So ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests and participants, I’m honored to be with you today in this panel about successes and challenges of 20-year journey of the VISIS. Tunis has the privilege to be linked to this summit through its report, referred to as Tunis Agenda and Outcomes. Some of you remember that IGF itself is an outcome of the VISIS 2005. Even if this VISIS 2005 took place before the boom of social media platforms, artificial intelligence, clouds, and blockchains, its recommendation remained relevant, promoting an open, resilient, unfragmented, and inclusive internet, endorsing human rights and cultural diversity. Tunisia recognizes that institutions such as ICANN and IQ have gone through many improvements since 2005 by supporting international domain names and allowing for more transparency and accountability, even if the government’s participation in ICANN remains at an advisory level, but that can be further improved and put to have meaningful impact. Today, emerging issues force themselves high items in the agenda more than the mere technical aspects, such as artificial intelligence applications, protecting people’s privacy and personal data when using over-the-top services and social media. Developing countries cannot deal with major platform providers on an equal-to-equal ground when it comes to taxation, for example, or imposing local rules for personal data protection. For that reason, Tunisia proposes to reconsider the framework of enhanced cooperation. We’re not suggesting bringing back the sterile debate on the government’s taking over the regulation of internet because the agility of private sector, civil society, and experts community is needed to keep leading internet to new horizons. What we’re recommending is simply the following. The multi-stakeholder approach in internet governance remains the most appropriate. We should keep seeking to implement equal footing and meaningful participation. ICANN, ITU, and other technical bodies have played major role in their respective responsibilities to ensure a stable internet. They should be supported for a resilient and unfragmented internet for all. We’re facing more complicated challenges than the mere technical coordination. IGF today is more relevant to share outcomes of the multiple forums and institutions involved in internet governance and needs to secure financing for bigger role and better outcomes. Enhanced cooperation led by CSTD can be useful to tackle emerging issues involving nations, such as managing cyber threats, cyber terrorism, the misuse of internet for money laundering, and the human trafficking. Other international institutions involved in internet issues, such as WIPO, WTO, UNESCO, and others, should be supported to ensure a stable internet for all nations. Each in its area of competencies and expertise must further develop multi-stakeholder approach, including open consultations and transparent reporting. And finally, each country should watch out for the potential digital gap between regions and social groups, since local digital problems have to be managed locally. Thank you.

anita gurumurthy:
Thank you very much. And now I will give the floor to Ms. Anita Gurumurthy, founding member and executive director of IT for Change India. And I think that you are going to give some remarks of, given the widespread of digitalization into almost all aspects of our life, how should WSIS be seen, and what international cooperation should be shaped? Please, Anita. Thank you so much. It’s an honor to be here. As we move towards the WSIS plus 20 mark, I think digital public policy issues, we all acknowledge, have expanded infinitely. Some of us here will recall that the WSIS Geneva principle, one of those principles in 2003, held an optimism. And I quote, we are firmly convinced that we are collectively entering a new era of enormous potential, it said. The problem today is that this promise of collective potential is broken. The AI moment is similar in many ways, and not so similar to the Gutenberg moment in the 14th century, when Gutenberg’s letterpress printing revolutionized the world of information and knowledge. AI is moving us to a society of archiving, like the printing press did. But unlike Gutenberg’s technology, the algorithms that order society today are indiscernible to the public. The printing press shifted power into the hands of private forces, taking it away from the state, and destabilizing the authority of the church. Today, the force field of knowledge is similarly controlled by corporations who seek servitude in exchange for data and information. Our connections are growing, as they did in the age of enlightenment, but algorithmic society is also a society of fragmentation. As much as the press led to suffragette movements, and in my own country, a struggle against coloniality, it also led to competing visions of the good and to bloodshed. So also, the geopolitical risks of AI for war and annihilation cannot be wished away. The digital is indeed a lever of power, and it is no accident that those who control these technologies have little incentive to change the status quo. The WSIS did call out the respective roles of governments and public policy unequivocally, including the need to advance international cooperation, especially for the governance of digital technologies. The starting point is to recognize what ails the cooperation, and I would like to highlight, in particular, the neocolonial dynamics of the data and AI economy that demand our immediate attention at this point at the WSIS Review. The first is that trade forums are often used quite wrongly by the more powerful countries to frame rules for cross-border flows of data. We need a separate space, a separate forum for the negotiations around data governance globally. Secondly, data for development initiatives tend to be extractive. They open up individuals to pan-spectronic surveillance, normalizing dependencies of public systems on extractive private firms. Thirdly, intellectual property regimes have been weaponized by big tech, and given the prohibitive licensing costs and other barriers to entry, including patents owned by big tech firms, the Global South firms find it an uphill task to scale up and leverage a market share. Big tech firms also often resort to preemptive patenting to retain their competitive advantage, stifling innovation and stifling development of domestic industry. Fourthly, the overemphasis on personal data protection at the cost of market regulation has proven to be detrimental. This means that large tech companies, typically owned and primarily operated by white men, are extracting data from uninformed users and controlling that data to profit via predictive analytics. Unfortunately, strong data protection laws will not prevent this domination. Fifthly, the silence around development financing is very, very loud. In fact, yesterday, the New York Times has carried an article by African leaders on why African debt needs to be written off. The odds are stacked against developing countries as pathways to digital sovereignty are really uphill. Recent shocks owing to COVID-19 has broken supply chains. Inflation is pushing many Global South nations to the verge of crises. So finally, I think that there is a four-pronged strategy that is needed in digital cooperation. Firstly, we need to initiate consensus for a global digital human rights constitutionalism that is not only liberal, but that is supraliberal, incisive enough to cut through the systemic injustices in the international economic order. Secondly, we effectively need to govern global data public goods, and it may be useful to consider rules for varying contributions from varying groups of actors, such as, for instance, through principles like common but differentiated responsibilities explode in various other international negotiations. Thirdly, we need to urgently mobilize public financing to galvanize digital innovation ecosystems. We often talk about digital public goods, but we don’t talk enough about public digital financing. I think we need to set that right. And the digital development tax mechanism proposed by the UN Secretary General is particularly relevant in this regard. And fourthly and finally, I think it’s still important, although it seems far away in our memories, to still meaningfully internationalize internet governance. It’s imperative that the internet as a global commons is governed democratically, and so we need a new arrangement to oversee the technical governance of the internet, an issue that was dropped from the policy table when there was this moment, but is indeed long overdue. Thank you very much.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Thank you very much. And now I would like to give the floor to Miss Anita Gurumurthy for her interesting remarks. And now I’ll give the floor to Miss Ariete Esterhizen, senior advisor on global and regional Internet governance, association for progressive communication in South Africa. So, Ariete, to what extent the situation today can be improved and how can we improve the way in which we communicate with each other and how can we facilitate this process? The floor is yours.

Anna Margaretha (anriette) Esterhuysen:
Thank you, Anna, and thanks very much for inviting me. I think that, you know, I’d like to respond both at the level of process and also at the level of substance. But first I want to say that we should recognize how powerful WSIS has been in terms of facilitating this process, and I think it’s very important for us to recognize that. And I think it’s very important for us to recognize that. I think Anna talked in her opening remarks about reading the WSIS outcome documents. I read them all the time, actually. And I read other U.N. outcome documents. There’s something very unique about the WSIS outcome documents. I think the fact that they are the outcome of contestation and the fact that they are the outcome of participation, and the fact that they are the outcome of participation is mediated by non-state actor participation and texts and views submitted by non-state actors. We weren’t always in the room, but if we were not in the room, we were at the back of the room. And we were in the caucusing in the corridors, and we submitted our own content and our own statements, and I think that is a very important part of the process. And I think that’s also reflected in the fact that all the groups had their own outcome documents. Our views are reflected in that. So that’s one thing, the process. I think secondly, the fact that WSIS is granular, that it has the Geneva principles which are broad-based, which highlight, which are people-centered, not tech-centered, which I feel many of our current documents, the WSIS documents speak much more powerfully as somebody who believes in social justice and equity from the global south. It’s about people-centered development. And it has human rights, the importance of human rights. It mentions open innovation and open source. When do you get that? So it has those broad overarching principles and the emphasis on governments having to play a role in creating an enabling environment. But then it’s also granular. It addresses some of the issues that are fundamental to having inclusive societies and effective accountable governance. It talks about education. It talks about food security through the agriculture action line, media freedom. And if you look at all the action lines, they all are very relevant. And then the action line on enabling environment talks about security and trust. So I think it actually has a lot of relevance. I think it has a lot of relevance because it talks about security and trust. So I think it actually frames, and perhaps it’s because it was not about the Internet. It was about ICTs, that it’s given it a longevity, I think that remains relevant. But it also means that it allowed space for advocacy groups that are working on social justice issues, that are working on trade justice issues. That are working on small-scale agriculture. On bringing education to people in remote areas who don’t have access via technology. In a sense, I think many of the responses that helped us cope with the COVID crisis, that was ground that was led by WSIS approaches and implementation. So I think that, so to go forward, I would say let’s build on that. Let’s continue to have spaces in the WSIS process that has opportunity for civil society to be not just consulted, but to actually shape the debate at some of the macro issues. The issues Anita just mentioned. The issues of financing. I think public financing is one of the failures. The lack of sufficient public financing. That debate is on the table again now because we’re talking about digital public infrastructure. Can we look at that from the lessons of WSIS? And it also still has those specific subject areas. So I think the important thing is to make the process inclusive. Not just consultation, but real collaborative shaping. Both at the sort of broader advocacy level, but also at the grassroots level. Where civil society, the only way in which you actually achieve change is when community organizations, have the power to have their own connectivity, to collaborate with small businesses. To work with local government. That’s where you actually have change on the ground. I think WSIS creates the space for civil society to be involved at all those levels. I definitely think that the IGF needs to be strengthened. And so has the WSIS forum. And I think that the tension sometimes between the two processes being so different, the one being more global south and the other one maybe being a little bit global north, I think that’s a productive tension. So let’s work with that. Let’s build on that. And then I think the final point on civil society collaboration also relates to the U.N. system. I think the U.N. system has its own diversity. It has relationships with different types of civil society organizations who work in different disciplines and different areas. And I’m sure they can all work together. I’m sure they can all be strengthened in terms of their inclusivity. But better collaboration within the U.N. system will also facilitate better collaboration and involvement of civil society. Thank you.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Thank you very much, Ariadne. I know that you read both documents and you were so much involved. And from your intervention, of course, we will acknowledge that you really read them and you were part of the process. So it’s very good to have you here. And to refresh some memories, it’s very good. Thank you. Now I will give the floor to Ms. Temilat Adalakun. So you will be the first speaker. So you will speak under two different hats. So Temilat is the youth ambassador of the Internet Society. And she is also associate product marketing manager of Google Africa. So Temilat, you are going to respond to questions because of your two hats. So from the youth perspective as youth ambassador, what do youth want from the WSIS process? And secondly, from the private sector perspective as Google manager, how can ongoing trends and emerging technologies, particularly artificial intelligence, enable or hinder the realization of the WSIS vision?

Audience:
Thank you so much, Ana. Good afternoon, everyone. Good morning, good evening, depending on wherever you are in the world. And standing on the existing protocol, my name is Temilat Adalakun. I’m also a product marketer at Google. Just like Ana mentioned, I’ll be wearing two hats today. One as a global youth ambassador and also an African youth. I will start with the first question. Because I’m here to actually advocate for a more inclusive and youth-centered approach in the world. So I’m going to start with the first question. So I’m a member of the African youth and African youth world summit on information society WSIS. I say unequivocally that the youth of today are deeply connected to the digital world through the use of platforms such as media, digital payment platforms, tech hubs and incubators, and even entrepreneurship, just to mention a few. So I’m here to advocate for a more inclusive and youth-centered approach in the world. So I’m going to start with the first question. So I’m a member of the African youth and African youth world summit on information society WSIS. I say unequivocally that the youth of today are deeply connected to the digital world through the use of platforms such as media, tech hubs and incubators, and even entrepreneurship, just to mention a few. So I’m here to advocate for a more inclusive and youth-centered approach in the world. So I’m a member of the African youth and African youth world summit on information society WSIS. I say unequivocally that the youth of today are deeply connected to the digital world through the use of platforms such as media, digital payment platforms, tech hubs and incubators, and even entrepreneurship, just to mention a few. So I’m a member of the African youth and African youth world summit on information society WSIS. I say unequivocally that the youth of today are deeply connected to the digital world through the use of platforms such as media, tech hubs and incubators, and even entrepreneurship, just to mention a few. So I’m a member of the African youth and African youth world summit on information society WSIS. I say unequivocally that the youth of today are deeply connected to the digital world through the use of platforms such as media, tech hubs and incubators, and even entrepreneurship, just to mention a few. Furthermore, we want WSIS to focus on initiatives to improve access to education and to empower us to actively represent in social and economic programs that influence technology in our respective countries across the continent. We want WSIS to focus on initiatives to improve access to education and to empower us to actively represent in social and economic programs that influence technology in our respective countries across the continent. I have a strong conviction that the WSIS process holds immense potential to be a powerful force for change and solution in Africa and the world. It’s a platform where we can utilize and work collaboratively to develop targeted solutions and ensure that ICT contributes to the development of the future. I would like to say that AI is a powerful tool for advancing human development and sustainable development goals. AI can enhance education and health care access. It can influence job creation, it can curtail global issues like climate change and even poverty. Also, AI can pave the way for a more inclusive and people centered information society by improving accessibility for persons living with disability, even through assistive technologies, including screen readers and text-to-speech software, which I know we are all aware of. Furthermore, AI paves a pivotal role in providing essential services, such as health care, education, and government services. It contributes to the diagnostic of treatment of diseases and even delivery of educational resources to remote areas. During COVID, we saw how AI was very useful in some of the initiatives that were brought about. However, AI also presents potential threats in the form of data privacy to the WSIS vision, including the creation of surveillance systems and new forms of discrimination and exclusion. It is imperative to ensure that AI is developed and employed in a manner that upholds human rights and aligns with the WSIS vision. The impact of AI on human development, SDGs, and WSIS vision hinges on responsible development and utilization. To achieve this, it is essential that we invest in research and understand AI’s ethical and social implications. It’s important that we also establish international standards and guidelines for its development and use to foster transparency, accountability, and even to ensure that AI is used in a way that is inclusive and inclusive. It’s important that we also establish international standards and guidelines for its development and use to foster transparency, accountability, and even to educate the public about AI’s potential benefits and risk and to teach individuals to have control over their own data and usage. In closing, I want to reiterate that the time is now. Together we can ensure that the WSIS process truly reflects the vision of the WSIS vision, and that the WSIS vision is the foundation for the future. Thank you, and I look forward to the discussions. Thank you.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Thank you, Temelat. Now we are almost opening the roundtable discussion, but before that, I will give the floor to our co-partners. I would like to start by thanking you for your vision and also Sharmika, the CSTD secretariat, for ensuring that it’s a joint process and that we are all working together on it.

Audience:
As we have been, you know, discussing all throughout that we have limited resources and we have limited resources and we have limited resources and we have limited resources and we have limited resources and we have limited resources and we have limited resources and we have limited resources and we all are all at the same team. We are all trying to get together, allowing our differences across the world that we have limited resources and capacities, and we areour joining hands to this process. Well, WSIS actually set the foundation of digital cooperation. We have been doing a lot in terms of digital cooperation, at least, you know, looking at how the UN has been working together and how we have been aligning with the different UN processes. For example, those of you who are involved in the WSIS forum, the WSIS special initiatives, the WSIS prizes, we have been aligning them with the decade of indigenous languages with UNESCO. And, of course, we are working with the UN to promote the role of digital in healthy aging. And so many other UN processes like the HLPF, we have been asked to align the WSIS action lines with the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, highlighting the role of digital in achieving the sustainable development goals. We have also been working with the WSIS and the UN General Assembly where we again highlighted the importance of digital preceding the UN General Assembly. So there are great examples of what the UN has been doing in collaboration, not only with each other, but also with all the stakeholders. The WSIS prizes is such a great example. We have been working with the UN to highlight the importance of digital preceding the UN and elevate their projects. Thank you for being here, so many of you. And, of course, some of the things that we need to pay attention on is you will recall, so, Anurag, like you. I think you achieved your two minutes. So I will give the floor to Mr. Cedric Vashvalt, the chief of digital policies and digital transformation section at UNESCO. Thank you, chair.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
It’s not a new thing. It’s something that we have been working on for a long time. We have been working with the UN to highlight the importance of digital

Prateek Sibal:
preceding the UN and elevate their projects. Thank you, Anurag. I’m a program specialist at UNESCO and will speak on behalf of UNESCO today. Thanks to the secretariat and CSTD for having us here. I would echo the remarks in terms of multistakeholderism and cooperation and I would like to focus more on some of the thematic achievements and challenges. UNESCO has been co-facilitating leading about six action lines and on access to information, I would like to share between 2016 and 2023, there have been about 1,200 Internet shutdowns globally. This remains a major challenge and UNESCO has been working on assessing Internet environments based on a rights-based, open, accessible and multistakeholder approach in about 45 countries and this work will need to be strengthened also with the support of civil society, academia and the private sector. We have been able to have access to information day, which is celebrated on 28th of September, which is a great moment for advocacy on open access to information in governments as well. As Gitanjali mentioned, there is a dimension of the decade of indigenous languages. So inclusion forms an important part of the work that the UN as a whole is doing here. Media and information literacy remains a major challenge when we are talking about disinformation, misinformation and in this domain, we have strengthened our programs also including youth, building dynamic coalitions. different actors and promote different kinds of responses whether it comes to fact-checking or supporting civil society organizations in upscaling. I will speak briefly about e-science. We have several standards that I’ll just stop soon. So just just several standard-setting instruments which are really bringing global communities together which is the recommendation on open science, the recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence, and the recommendation on open educational resources have become central tools which are being mobilized to build communities globally. So looking forward to the input and the feedback over here and we continue to remain engaged with the business process and with our partners here. Thank you. Okay, thank you

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
very much. So now Mr. Robert Opp, Chief Digital Officer at UNDP. Hello, two minutes.

Robert Opp:
Thank you. I don’t plan to take two minutes. We’re here to listen and I think it’s the issues that are coming up already are extremely relevant and it’s great to hear the themes that are emerging. I think if I think back 20 years ago and think of what’s changed I think probably for the people in this room and those who were involved the ICT or the ICT for development was would be considered quite important but I think today you cannot deny that it is an absolute mega trend driving global change and issues worldwide. In the order of climate change which has also become a super mega trend and I think that that means that the urgency is greater than ever and we’ve done a lot in the last 20 years but the pace of change is accelerating and so that’s when we look forward to WSIS plus 20 and working together with our UN partners and all of the multi-stakeholder groups this is what we need to keep in mind that it’s an urgent situation. So I will leave it there and thank you chair and thank you

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
to the secretary. Thank you very much sir. So now I will open for our free styles roundtable discussion after thanking to all the discussion starters. Yes so now we have to manage all the people that are going to intervene. So I think sir you were first then we have you and three so then European Commission on behalf of the European Union and then Cuba. So please who can help me? Can you help me? Looking around. So we have already so I have four in my mind

Audience:
here and not in the rear. Thank you very much Anna. I’m Peter Brook I’m the chairman of the World Summit Award. So you have three minutes. We have started in 2003 to focus on the best practice in content in with the ICT. It’s an Austrian member state initiative which we have for one now for the last 20 years every year. We have had 12,800 participants 1,600 winners according to the action lines C7 from the business plan of action. I think that the review is a very difficult exercise and I’m saying this very clearly because I think that business and the business process has lost half of its focus. The first focus is on digital divide and digital inclusion. I think and it was speaking about this and I also a friend from India was speaking about it but the other side was and is still the question of the transformation into the knowledge society and I would say that we have technology success but knowledge failure and if you are looking at disinformation misinformation hate speech fake news and things like this these are issues which we need to take seriously. That’s the first point. The second point is this is pre sustainable development goals. It is millennium development goals and the difference between the millennium development goals and sustainable development goals is that in sustainable development goals we have 176 indicators which give us actually KPIs of what we have achieved. The Tunis plan of action does not have KPIs and therefore we have a real issue in terms of the review and the review will be a moving back and forth and so on. The last thing is which I want to stress is we have in the Tunis plan of action a line which many people have not known it’s C9 and that is media and the media is a completely different kind of landscape today due to the economics of digital platform monopolization. We have this year for the first time in human history or talking about the Gutenberg moment is 54% of global advertising revenues goes to five American companies and it means that digital publishing I’m talking about community publishing in Canada 567 papers have been closed in the last two months. So if you’re thinking about media diversity and things like this then you’re just really looking at something where we are really having a loss of all those intermediaries which we have called editorial added value and that needs to be front and center in the review and I’m offering the World Summit Award and the International Center for New Media and its partners in 182 countries as a partner also in this exercise. Thank you

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
very much. Thank you very much and I hope that you will be able to to respond to the questionnaire in written form as everything that you said is very important as everybody’s that is talking here but responding to the questionnaire will be very very important. Now I’ll give the floor to Bangladesh. Bangladesh

Audience:
Madam Chair, when I entered the WSIS era that time I was the youth ambassador of the WSIS. Now I am former youth. Okay I asked my CSTD secretary to share what does Bangladesh expect from the future WSIS. I’m so grateful for giving me the opportunity. Bangladesh government, Bangladesh is the very unique country regarding implementation the WSIS action line. Bangladesh government formed Bangladesh working group on WSIS with a multi-stakeholder and I am one of the proud member of the Bangladesh working group on WSIS. After summit C1 to C11 Bangladesh government has integrated with the five-year plan as well as CSO also integrated C1 to C11 of their annual plan. Thirdly as a result Bangladesh government and CSO combinedly, technical community received lots of WSIS prize as the winner as a champion also. Fourth CSO and Bangladesh government has successfully addressed the COVID-19 operation disaster through ICT application that is called C7 ICT application and as WSIS outcome Bangladesh has been organizing the Bangladesh Internet Governance Forum. This is the National Internet Governance Forum with a multi-stakeholderism. Madam Chair, we expect from the future of WSIS. Bangladesh government has already declared the smart Bangladesh in line with the digital Bangladesh. There are four area, achieving sustainable economic growth, reducing poverty, ensure social and justice and third one is the very important, creating a digital and knowledge-based society. Madam Chair, thorough four area, one is the smart citizen, another one is the smart society, another one is smart economy and as well as smart government. In conclusion, we need a WSIS forum regularly. It is really multi-stakeholderism. Second, now we are preparing for participation in the WSIS forum 2024 including member of the parliament as well as the mayor of the municipal corporation promoting local governance. Third, we would appreciate it if the WSIS Secretariat would publish a handbook for the parliamentarian and as well as mayor like IGF Secretariat. It would be very useful. Fourth, summit of the PSAR and GDC process can learn from the WSIS and as well as IGF Secretariat what is multi-stakeholderism. Thank you, madam.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Okay, thank you very much and now I think it’s the time to give the floor to Kuba and then European Commission. Dear colleagues, on December 12, 2003, the first phase of the

Audience:
World Summit on the Information Society ended with the adoption of its final documents by the head of state and government of 175 countries. After arduous discussions, the developing countries succeeded in having the so-called digital divide recognized as a dimension of the existing economic and social divisions and allowed this topic to move out of the technical debate at the expert level and become a political issue of concern to the international community. 20 years later, it has been demonstrated without a doubt that the information and communication technologies in general and the Internet in particular are essential tools for the development of the countries, but it has also been confirmed that this beneficial impact of ICTs and the Internet is significantly lower in developing countries compared to developed countries. The unfulfillment of many of the WSIS agreements has had a negative impact on developing countries. For example, financial mechanisms to address the challenges of using ICT for development has not been established. In addition, persists the application of unilateral measures not in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations that impedes the full achievement of economic and social development of the affected countries. Madam Chair, dear colleagues, all these issues were addressed with concern by numerous heads of state and government at the G77 and China Summit held in Havana, Cuba last September, and whose central theme was current development challenges, the role of science, technology and innovation. The final declaration of this summit reaffirmed the 2005 Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, stating that the G77 and China promote a close alignment between the World Summit of Information Society process and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It also called for a close correspondence of the WSIS process with the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and other outcomes of relevant intergovernmental processes, including the Global Digital Compact and the Summit of the Future. It was further agreed to work towards a strong and concerted position of the G77 and China to ensure that the WSIS plus 20 general review process, the Global Digital Compact and the Summit of the Future contribute to inter alia the achievement of sustainable development and closing the digital divide between developed and developing countries. It was reiterated that the Tunis Agenda and the Geneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action shall lay down the guiding principles for digital cooperation. Madam Chair, dear colleague, I am finishing. The Declaration of Principles or the first phase of WSIS entitled Building the Information Society, a Global Challenge for the New Millennium, established a common view of the information society which among other attributes should be people centered, inclusive and developer oriented. In addition, the declaration noted… Okay, I think that your main message was already conveyed. No, I will finish by saying that it’s up to us now to finally make a reality of that common vision that was envisioned 20 years ago. Thank you.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Muchas gracias. Very well, thank you very much. Now I’ll give the floor to Mr. Pierce O’Donoghue who is going to speak on behalf of the European Union.

Pearse O’donohue:
Thank you. Yes, I’m speaking on behalf of the European Union and its member states. We welcome the opportunity to share lessons learned from the WSIS implementation process at this crucial moment in the history of the Internet. We cannot appreciate the Internet’s unprecedented success without recognizing the vital role of the WSIS and the multi-stakeholder model it has advocated. The European Union continues to support the principles set out in the Geneva Action Plan and the Tunis Agenda, but our efforts do not end here. The multi-stakeholder model is not flawless, but it is still our most reliable instrument for effective Internet governance and the foundation for a dynamic system involving all stakeholders in the running of the Internet. We shall make every effort to ensure that it will never be replaced. The IGF is living proof that this cooperative approach works. Its value stems from adopting a vibrant multi-stakeholder approach and ensuring that voices from governments to private sector, civil society, the technical community and academia are heard and engaged in pivotal discussions on the Internet’s future and governance. The EU strongly supports a proactive and ambitious approach towards keeping human rights as the foundation of an open, free and secure online space, based on human-centric digitalization, preserving human dignity and equality of all people without discrimination of any kind, online and offline. We welcome the setting up of the UN Secretary-General’s high-level Advisory Board on Artificial Intelligence. The EU AI Act, which puts the impact of artificial intelligence technologies to the centre, may serve as a model for regulation elsewhere. But as we approach WSIS plus 20, we have a golden opportunity to bolster this framework and to reinforce our foundational multi-stakeholder principles. Establishing centralized control over the Internet and its governance system is not an option. Our focus should be, on the contrary, to keep its openness and freedom. This vision aligns with the SDGs. As the EU highlighted in its recent statement on the UN Global Digital Compact, swifter progress on the SDGs goes hand-in-hand with our commitment to a more inclusive digital future and to bridging the digital divides. In this regard, the EU and its member states are working hard through the Global Gateway, as Team Europe, to deploy digital networks and infrastructures worldwide, prioritizing under-served regions, countries and populations. In pursuing this digital future, it is critical that the IGF strengthens its role in fostering an inclusive, open and sustainable digital environment and evolves into an even more impactful and inclusive model. This is a shortened version of our statement, you’ll be glad to know, and the full version will be made available shortly. Thank you very

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
much. And now I will give the floor to the behind you. Thank you very much, thank you

Audience:
Madam Chair, thank you everybody, thank you colleagues here. My name is Atsushi Yamanaka, I’m a senior advisor on digital transformations at Japan International Cooperation Agencies, but I’m actually wanted to make a questions to you, as an individual who has, you know, intimately involved in the WSIS process, and where, like, you know, especially in the financial mechanism part, I used to be working in the UNDP. Now, three weeks ago, I was at a digital summit, ESDG Digital Summit, and it struck me, so like, fundamental questions that we have actually asked 20 years ago, remain the same. Fundamental things such as digital inclusions, financial mechanisms, all these things actually remain the same, and it struck me, saying, I should have worked harder, perhaps. In 20 years, I should actually have worked harder, so I can make a difference, and then solve some of these fundamental challenges. Now, we are the barge, as the robot ops said, of digital technology, which is like a fad, right? It was like I sit for developers’ fat at the WSIS process. And then remember what’s happened after 2005. Everybody who actually went out, I said, like, sorry, we had enough of this. The development partners, they left, you know, they left, and even developing countries who are really excited about this, they left. So my questions to you is, what can we do, you know, how can we do something different this time? Because these two years are going to be critical. You know, we’re going to have the summit for the future summit next year. We’re going to have digital compact. We’re going to have WSIS plus 20 in 2025. If we cannot make a difference this time, I believe that we’re going to have the same failure we saw from 2005 to around 2012. These seven years of dark age of digital development. So I urge you, all of you, can we actually come up with real concrete solutions and something that we can make a difference, say, yes, digital technology, and then ICT can actually work for everybody to create the information society and also for the development of developing countries. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. So please. Oh my God. Hanslet, please go ahead. Thank you very much. Hanslet from the Gambia NRI. I just want us to go back and look at why there are big disparities as we look into the WSIS plus 20. You discover that it’s good when we have all the UNDP, the ITU, UNESCO, they claim they work together at the top level. If you go down to the bottom level, there’s no cooperation at country level. And that is why we are still dealing with big gaps in the digital divide. And the NRIs are now well-strengthened that they can help all these big international agencies on the ground. And I will suggest that moving forward, you have to work with the NRIs because the governments are part of that process. A good example I will stop at, I’m recently doing the UNESCO IOR, Internet Universal Indicators, as a lead researcher in the Gambia. UNDP are not involved. When I contacted them, they didn’t know about the ROMEX, UNDP country office. So how do you filter down information? And we have to really look at that seriously. It’s good, folks, yes, it’s from New York or Geneva, and say blah, blah, blah, we work together on the ground level. Do you really work together? Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ponslet. Now, please. My name is Izumi Aiz. I am living in Japan. I used to be participating in all the prep and processes of the WSIS. I do agree with what my friend, colleague, Atsushi, said. Have we done our homework? We used to have much more dissenting voices to hear. From the East and South. Where’s China now here? Iran, India, Russia, South Africa? I don’t see them. In the very beginning, we have heated debate about who’s gonna speak this or that, and a lot of rules, but substances. And many of which the civil society like us didn’t really agree with. But it was a very interesting creative processes that we tried to listen to each other. And I feel like it’s gone. I might be naive, but WSIS was proposed right after the 9-11 processes. There were big fears from the South that digital development would leave them out, the digital divide. But even the countries like the US or Japan, others who have the monies, wanted to let them come in together discuss. That, to me, was the genesis of the WSIS. Where is it? I was invited to the China’s World Internet Conference Digital Dialogue on, no, Dialogue on Digital Civilization in June this year. Oh, yeah. I was the only Japanese. There were only 19 participants from overseas. You can blame China not inviting them, but that’s not the way. There’ll be another World Internet Conference next month. Let’s see how many will join together. Also, today, we heard what’s going on in Israel and Palestine. Nobody really in this room tried to address that. Does it relate to the ICT? Of course. How about the things going on in Eastern Russia or Russian side? We carefully avoided these hot potatoes, perhaps. But I feel like the ICT is very powerless. And talking about the SDGs and human rights. Also, how about the status of women in certain countries? It went worse than 20 years ago, as we all know. So, how much ICT could play? How much we have done? Of course, there are areas that they played a very good job, but we cannot just remain optimistic and ask AI for rescue or whatever. So, the multi-stakeholder approach and the human-centric approach, I agree with Agnieta. Yes, it was a great result of our Europe-led sweat and tears of many days in Geneva and the other way. So, multi-stakeholder was not given. It will erode if you don’t do more. How about the climate change? We had the worst summer in Japan and many others. How can technologies do while consuming a lot of servers and energies on the AI? They might be regulated. So, I’d like really, all of you, me, address these real difficult issues and just don’t resort to the friendly, nice, warm environment that Kyoto presents. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now, I’ll give the floor to Peter Mayer, please. Thank you. I want to react. I didn’t intend to react directly, indirectly, but anyway. So, multi-stakeholders. I think in this environment and in this CSTD Open Forum, we can be proud. We can be proud because we were one of the first ones who implemented or tried to introduce the multi-stakeholder approach in our work, in the working groups. It wasn’t simple. In the first working group, it was very controversial. In the second working group, it was smooth. So, personally, I’m proud of it. And on behalf of the CSTD, I think we can be proud of that. So, probably, this is the way to go forward, not only in the CSTD, but the whole UN. That’s for one. Hot potato. We are in the setting of the IGF. The IGF, we may think, is very relevant. That’s what we think. Do other stakeholders think the same way? Do governments think the same way? I’m afraid not. And why? Because we have the IGF with its outcomes, and it is mandated to have outcomes, but it’s also mandated not to have resolutions. So, if there is no resolution in the UN, you don’t exist. So, how can we bridge this gap? CSTD is mandated to review the processes within the UN system. IGF is part of the UN system. IGF Secretariat regularly gives report to the CSTD. We listen to that, and we write one sentence. IGF Secretariat gave the report. We don’t know about the content. We don’t know about any recommendations. We don’t follow up, and that is the key. We should follow up. We should have in the resolution the key messages. We should have, if not in the resolution, because it is a very hot debate all the time. I have the experience. But we can manage. We can manage to have it in the resolution. We can manage to have it in the annex of the chair’s report, but we should forward it to the ECOSOC and through ECOSOC to the UN General Assembly in order that all stakeholders, that is all member states will be aware that we are doing something which is relevant, which is relevant not only in the field of ICTs, but which is relevant for the sustainable development goals. Thank you.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Hi. Thank you, Peter, very much. I just would like to emphasise that it’s a pity that some of the governments that make our lives sometimes very difficult in our discussions at the CSCD, they are not here, so they cannot hear. No, Cuba is still here. No, but Cuba is here, yes. It’s living. Nigel, Nigel. Who asked first? I don’t know. I thought, please, sir, go ahead, and then Nigel. Introduce, introduce yourself, please.

Audience:
My name is Dinesh. I come from near Bangalore in a rural area where we have a community network. And our main activity is research on how to include low literate people as first class citizens of the internet. That’s one thing that I think there are more than three billion people who come under this, and I don’t see that we are focusing on them. Can we find internet access, but not what does it mean for low literacy? That means that if you don’t know how to read or write, what is internet for you? What is Google for you? Can you do keywords? What is the results for you? What can you do with it? Think like that. There are too many people we just don’t wanna see or not willing to think that there is something we can do about it. And it’s time we have technical people from the ground who are interested in addressing this issue and get them together and see what can be done about bringing internet as a first class available thing for low literate people.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
Thank you very much, Nigel. UK, please.

Audience:
Yes, thank you very much. I’ll sit next to you, yeah. God, I’m exhausted after that. Sorry, Nigel Hickson, Department of Science, Innovation and Technology for the UK. And really, I just wanted to say about three things. I think first, it’s really excellent to have this debate here. I mean, if we can’t have a thorough, controversial, open and constructive debate about the WSIS process at the IGF, then we can’t have it anywhere. So it’s really excellent to have it here. Secondly, I listened to Piers O’Donoghue speak and I thought, well, he’s speaking for the whole of the European Union, so I needn’t say anything. And then I forgot that we’re not in the European Union. So, yeah. So I’m getting to the end of my career so I can say things like that. But I wanted to completely endorse what he said. I think it’s just so important that we have these discussions. And I think it’s so important that we also recognise where we have come from. And we also, we recognise what’s happened since 2005, not just in terms of technology, which we all understand and many of us have experienced here. But we also recognise the work that’s taken place in the UN CSDD, in the reports that have been written, in the WSIS Forum where we’ve had excellent discussions year after year on many issues, the work that UNESCO has done as well, and many other regional UN bodies and other bodies. There hasn’t been silence since 2004. There’s been evolution. There’s been evolution across the spectrum. There’s been evolution at ICANN. There’s been evolution at IGF. There’s been evolution in UN CSDD. We have moved forward. Yes, and of course it’s not perfect. And that’s why it was so wise at Tunis that the language in the Tunis Agenda said, yeah, you ought to review it. We ought to review it. We reviewed it after 10 years and we ought to review it again. I mean, let’s lift the drain covers up. Let’s lift those covers up as other people have said and review it. But let’s not forgotten where we’ve come from and the progress we’ve made. And let’s not forget either of why we got together in Geneva and Tunis. It wasn’t to discuss internet governance as such. It wasn’t to discuss the mechanisms of the internet, but there’s no harm in discussing that. It was to do better than that. It was to connect people. It was to discuss why we have disparities, regional disparities. And as we heard from the ITU Secretary General at the beginning of this conference, and we heard from many other people, we still have those issues. So let’s focus. Let’s focus on development. Let’s focus on sustainability. Let’s focus on what really matters. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Moderator – Ana Cristina Ferreira Amoroso Das Neves:
And with Nigel Hickinson from UK, I think that we come to an end of this first open consultation. I would like to send my heartfelt gratitude to each and every one of you for your active and valuable participation throughout this session. Your contributions have greatly enriched our discussions. Don’t forget the questionnaire. Please fulfill this questionnaire. That, of course, is not here in paper. It is in the virtual world, is in the website of CSTD. It will be in the session, in the website of the IGF in this session, and it will be spread widely. And it will be very important to have your inputs in written form. And with that, I declare the first open consultation closed. If we will be in the UN, I would have a hammer. So as I don’t have a hammer, I will use bottle of water.