.: Latest News :. .:News in Pictures:.




Horoscope Recipes

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald




Weather

Dawn Classified

Cowasjee Ayaz Mazdak Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images

Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story



Science.com

March 12, 2005



Whose land is it, anyway?



By S. A. J. Shirazi


WHO should govern the internet? This question is being hotly debated amongst techies around the world. In 2003, world representatives at the first phase of the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva agreed to pursue the dialogue on internet governance with a view to preparing the ground for a decision at the second phase of WSIS to be held in Tunis in November.

Those who have been following the news related to internet governance (read control) may recall two documents — the Declaration of Principles and an Action Plan — that discussed the ways to bridge the digital gap between rich and poor nations and questions like internet governance. It also recommended methods for extending new technologies to developing countries.

When it came to internet governance, those governments who did not want to shift the control to any international body resorted to the time tested method of avoiding debate (and eventually, drawing a conclusion) on controversial issues. Ironically, this was viewed as one of the biggest victories by the developing world.

The adopted Action Plan called for deliberations on internet governance. “International Internet governance issues should be addressed in a coordinated manner. We ask the Secretary-General of the United Nations to set up a working group on internet governance, in an open and inclusive process that ensures a mechanism for the full and active participation of governments, the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries involving relevant intergovernmental and international organizations and forums, to investigate and make proposals for action, as appropriate, on the governance of internet by 2005,” reads Action Plan.

The United Nations’ secretary-general established a Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) with a task to present the result of its work in a report “for consideration and appropriate action for the second phase of the WSIS in Tunis 2005” (Action Plan, 2003). The main activity of WGIG was “to investigate and make proposals for action, as appropriate, on the governance of internet by 2005.”

WGIG was also supposed to develop a working definition of internet governance; to identify the public policy issues that are relevant to internet governance and to develop a common understanding of the respective roles and responsibilities of governments, existing international organizations and other forums as well as the private sector and civil society from, both, developing and developed countries.

WGIG is a group of experts chartered by the Plan of Action. WGIG members were appointed by the UN secretary-general following consultations with stakeholders and were chosen so to form an inclusive group that would collectively have the necessary skills on different issues; while composition is balanced in terms of geography and stakes, there is no direct representation involved.

After some six meetings and lot of deliberations, WGIG has released a number of papers including the preliminary report on internet governance, reflecting the results of its findings. These papers provide a basis for the ongoing work of the group. Governments and other interested parties are invited to provide the WGIG secretariat with input and comments on the draft papers.

The WGIG report on internet governance identifies international organizations and agreements affecting the internet, and points out where there are conflicts and gaps. It also defines what the internet is and what falls within the scope of internet governance for purposes of WGIG deliberations.

The report asks national and international authorities to come to terms with what it calls two basic facts about the internet: its non-territorial nature and the end-to-end principle. It also calls upon the state-driven international system to “find a foundation of legitimacy and accountability” for non-state actors such as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).

Nitin Desai, chairman of the working group and special adviser to the UN secretary-general Kofi Annan, believes that this group will help in setting up a system where cyberspace would be in control of the United Nations. This is subject to the final decision expected to be taken at the upcoming WSIS to be held in in Tunis this November.

Currently, the internet is maintained by ICANN, a non-profit, California-based group who works in conjunction with the United States Department of Commerce to administer the Domain Name System, which gives out web addresses like .com, .org, .net.

There are two different opinions on the issue. Some countries, such as China, South Africa, India and Brazil, fearing US control, wish a greater UN say to oversee matters related to the internet but many western countries like USA, various industry groups and some others are opposed to the idea of handing over the responsibility of the internet to the UN. The reason? An unfounded concern that this could give more power to governments and politicize technical decisions, which could affect the free flow of information.

Supporters of UN control want the International Telecommunication Union, a 138-year-old trade body that among other things established country code rules for international telephone calls, in order to deal with internet governance properly.

On the other hand, the critics of UN control think that allowing the UN to get involved with internet governance would only make the internet another area for policy disputes between member nations, where international politics would corrupt the process.

The second phase of WSIS is scheduled to be held in Tunis, Tunisia, from 16 to 18 Nov, 2005, where the issue of internet governance will be discussed in addition to supervising the progress that has been made since the first summit. Given the nature of the issue and the stakes involved, it is still difficult to predict the outcome of the summit. However, whatever the decision, one hopes that the issue will finally be put to rest, making the internet a safer and better medium of communication and information.

The writer contributes regularly to Sci-tech World



Click to learn more...
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)

Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2005