SOCINFODO: FORO DE GOBIERNO DEL INTERNET

>INVITACION CONSULTAS FORO DE GOBIERNO DEL INTERNET
>
>Estimada membresía de la CNSIC
>
>Por este medio les informamos que acaba de ser creada una página Web para
>facilitar el proceso consultivo del Foro de Gobierno del Internet, el cual
>fue acordado en la segunda fase de la CMSI en Túnez en noviembre del 2005.
>En esta reunión se acordó que el Secretario General de Naciones Unidas
>deberá convocar, en un proceso abierto e inclusivo, un Foro de Gobierno
>del Internet (IGF, por sus siglas en inglés) para el diálogo de políticas
>relacionadas con dicho tema, en el cual participarán todos las partes
>interesadas.
>
>La dirección de la página es http://www.IntGovForum.org
>
>El proceso de consulta para este foro se ha abierto y las primeras
>reuniones consultas relativas al IGF, se realizaran en Ginebra, los días
>16 y 17 de febrero de 2006. Para guiar este proceso se ha elaborado un
>cuestionario que puede ser descargado de la página del foro.
>
>Para la CNSIC y el país es muy importante poder participar de este
>proceso, por esta razón les invitamos a que nos envíen sus contribuciones
>siguiendo la guía del cuestionario y que las mismas sean enviadas a mi
>dirección electrónica (aarango@indotel.org.do). Una vez recibidos estos
>aportes estaríamos convocando a una reunión en el INDOTEL en la semana del
>6 de febrero para discutir las contribuciones nacionales al desarrollo de
>este foro.
>
>Cualquier duda o aclaración estamos a la orden para colaborar con ustedes.
>Saludos cordiales,
>Amparo

Questionnaire on the Convening the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
==================================================================

1 The Tunis Agenda sets out various functions for the forum. Paragraph 72
(g) indicates that a possible outcome of its meetings could be
recommendations (“where appropriate”). Paragraph 72 (l) asks the IGF to
produce a report (“to publish its proceedings”) as its output.
(a) What outcome would you expect from an IGF meeting?
(b) Should there be any other output apart from the report?

2 The Tunis Agenda describes the IGF as “multilateral, multi-stakeholder,
democratic and transparent” (para 73) and sets out many functions it should
assume (see paras 72 and 77). However, it leaves open questions of
participation as well as periodicity, duration and type of IGF meetings,
including on-line aspects and virtual collaboration and participation.
Several delegations endorsed the proposal contained in the WGIG Report,
i.e. to create a Forum that should be modelled on the WGIG open
consultations, where all stakeholders participated on an equal footing.
(a) Could the WGIG open consultations constitute a possible model for the
IGF?
(b) How often should the Forum meet?
(c) How long should its meetings be?
(d) Should meetings be considered subject to UN rules, such as
accreditation, rules of procedure or languages?
(e) How could the IGF make best possible use of ICTs and promote virtual
interaction?

3 The Tunis Agenda has a strong development focus. It raises questions
related to access to the Internet (para 72(e)) as well as to developing
country participation in Internet Governance mechanisms (para 72 (f)). It
also emphasizes that the IGF needs “to contribute to capacity-building for
Internet Governance in developing countries, drawing fully on local sources
of knowledge and expertise” (para 72 (h)).

(a) How should the IGF approach access issues (“availability and
affordability of the Internet”)?
(b) Para 72 (f) indicates that special measures ought to be taken to
facilitate developing country participation in the IGF itself. What should
be done?
(c) What should be the focus of capacity-building initiatives?

4 Para 78 (b) calls on the Secretary-General to “establish an effective and
cost-efficient bureau to support the IGF, ensuring multi-stakeholder
participation”.
(a) Does this para refer to a bureau as it is normally used in an
intergovernmental context, such as the WSIS bureau?
(b) Would it be a bureau to deal with organizational issues and prepare
agenda and programme of the IGF meetings?
(c) If so, how should it be composed?
(d) Alternatively, could it be a high-level senior advisory body to
provide overall direction and shape to the IGF meetings?
(e) If so, how should it be composed?

5 Para 78 (b) can also be interpreted as referring to a secretariat function.
(a) Could this function be assumed by existing institutions, which could
take turns in providing the secretariat for the IGF?
(b) Alternatively, is there need for an independent secretariat?
(c) If a secretariat is established,
          (i) Where should it be based?
          (ii)What should be its linkage to the United Nations
Secretary-General?

6 Para 73 addresses aspects related to the structure of the IGF, which
should be “lightweight and decentralised” and build on “existing structures
of Internet governance, with special emphasis on the complementarity
between all stakeholders involved in this process”.
What does this mean in practice?
(a) Does the decentralized structure refer to a support structure
(secretariat) or the Forum itself, or both?
(b) Does it point to additional expert meetings and / or programme
committees, which could report back to the IGF and help prepare its
meetings? Should possible sub-structures be supported by organizations with
the relevant expertise?

7 The Tunis Agenda does not elaborate on aspects related to the funding of
the IGF.
How do you think the IGF should be financed?

8 Para 74 mentions the “proven competencies of all stakeholders in Internet
governance and the need to ensure their full involvement”.
What steps should be taken to identify and engage all stakeholders and what
needs to be done to make best possible use of their competencies?

9 Para 74 also encourages the Secretary-General “to examine a range of
options for the convening of the Forum”.
Are there any other options not addressed in the questions above? What are
these options as you understand them?

10 Paragraph 72 (a) of the Tunis Agenda gives the IGF the mandate to
“discuss public policy issues related to key elements of Internet
governance in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security,
stability and development of the Internet”.
(a) What are these issues?
(b) Are they all the issues mentioned in the Chapter on Internet
Governance in the Tunis Agenda?
(c) Which issues should be treated as priorities?
(d) Could these issues constitute a work programme for the coming years?

11 The first meeting of the Internet Governance Forum should take place “no
later than 2006”

(a) When would be the best time for the meeting?
(b) What should be on its agenda?
(c) Should it focus on one or at the most two issues that would be dealt
with in depth, or should it discuss a wide range of issues?
(d) How should its programme be designed (time-management plan,
organizational aspects)?

12 Any other comments, suggestions or questions that should be addressed?
Please let us know your views on any other issues that ought to be addressed.

*Please send all submissions in either .rtf , text or . pdf via email.
Received on Tue Jan 24 18:16:58 2006