No Consensus Emerging at WSIS on Internet Governance
TUNIS, Tunisia -- Consensus is emerging on some Internet governance issues as the 2nd World Summit of the Information Society draws near, but agreement remains elusive on the key issue of ICANN oversight, officials here said. Following the first night sessions at the resumed Preparatory Committee (Prepcom) Sun., Canada presented a paper with 10 consensus points, closely resembling WSIS I principles. But changes in oversight and the 13 root zone servers and root zone file remain hotly debated with no solution in sight.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The U.S. delegation again clearly rejected any proposal for a new oversight mechanism. Answering Brazilian delegates’ demand for a new place for international govts. to discuss ccTLD issues -- in line with one of 4 principles promoted in June by the NTIA -- Richard Beaird of the U.S. delegation said govts. already organize their ccTLDs based on national policies. “Some governments have chosen to give their TLD to a private institution; some have chosen to give it to a university; others have chosen to retain the authority over their country code,” said the State Dept.’s Beaird. A new oversight body would limit this flexibility, he warned.
Regarding a “new cooperation model” proposed by an E.U. aligning with developing countries, Beaird said the U.S. delegation opposed such a model because it was associated with ideas to establish a new international govt. body. “This would be the wrong signal sent from the summit,” said Beaird. Strong support for the U.S. position came from the Australian delegation, which said current oversight mechanisms work well enough.
But the British delegate, speaking for the 25 EU member states, said the EU is ready to consider other words for the negotiated text, “as long as we keep the underlying concept in mind.” The proposal wasn’t meant to install a new global regulatory body, but should be seen as “variable geometry building on existing structures,” he said.
The EU position on the new cooperation model’s scope is misunderstood, a German official told Washington Internet Daily immediately before the resumed Prepcom talks. “We don’t want and, more, we cannot take over any operational function,” he said. But the EU standing body of national govt. representatives (Coreper) confirmed Thurs. its position that change is necessary in regard to sole U.S. oversight of core Internet resources. No global superregulator was intended only a lightweight, non-U.N. body, possibly with only some govts. participating.
But Arab representatives asked for a World Internet Council. They were supported by the Chinese ambassador, who said: “Why should this not be put under U.N. control? There is no need to be afraid of the UN!” A change in the Internet governance mechanism was agreed on in phase one of the Summit, said the Chinese Ambassador, but must be put into action.
Beaird pointed to ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee as a mechanism where govt. concerns could be and actually have been voiced, but that didn’t satisfy even the least strident critics. “First we would have to get rid of the ‘A’ in GAC,” said the Brazilian delegate. Swiss delegate Marc Furrer said WSIS should create legal grounds or a mandate to the GAC to make improvements, to be sure GAC reform occurs: “Otherwise it will not happen.” The Iranian delegate asked: “What would be the ceiling of such a reform?” He made clear the majority wants at least a commitment from the U.S. to some reform, even if WSIS doesn’t resolve the debate.
An ICANN-independent GAC overseeing ICANN has been considered but rejected several times. In Dec., said Beaird, the GAC will meet to discuss ways to improve its work, and all govts. could make their points then. But without a commitment to change at the WSIS this week, “why bother to go to the GAC meeting in December?” asked the Brazilian delegate.