Internet Governance Task Force of Japan

Contribution 1, Draft Ver. 1.5 (Sep 6, 2004)

Contribution Draft Ver. 1.5(PDF)

Contribution to the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG)
first consultation meeting 20-21 September, 2004. Geneva

Draft Ver. 1.5, Sep 6, 2004

IGTF-J (Internet Governance Task Force of Japan)
We welcome your comments and suggestions. SInce the deadline for submission is Sep 13, we need your comments by Sep 11, the latest. The earlier the better ;-).

Internet Governance Task Force of Japan is a joint group, established in August 2004 by the individuals and organizations from the Japanese Internet Community and Private Sector, to engage in the activities of the Working Group on Internet Governance WSIS called for, and to achieve safe and trusted global framework of Internet operation and application through maintaining and further developing the private sector-led management. We consider that this WGIG process will offer us a tremendous opportunity for the international community to achieve full consensus on this difficult and important subject and we are excited to be able to work together with the members of the Working Group to produce its fruitful and constructive outcome.

1 Scope of work
To achieve the objective described in the WSIS Geneva Documents, the Working Group should carry out the following tasks:
a) Identifying the issues around Internet operation and application that require world-wide discussion and examination
b) Collecting the basic facts and relevant data and information
c) Stocktaking the activities already in place, evaluating what is and what is not working, and analyzing their reasons
d) Prioritizing the matters of importance,
e) Enlisting possible options and solutions where improvements and innovations are found to be necessary.
f) Defining the roles of actors in each sector (Government, Private Sector, Civil Society and International organizations) in relation with the above options and solutions

The Working Group should stick to the subject of Internet Governance in its accurate and clear scope, concentrate on core and/or urgent issues that requires international cooperative activities only, should refrain from expanding or interfering other areas of policy concerns already addressed in reasonable degree.

2 Basic Principles

Be Independent
The Working Group should be an independent body organized directly under the auspices of the Secretary General of the United Nations. We believe that the very idea of asking Secretary General of the United Nations to setup this Working Group as the outcome of the WSIS Geneva is to provide an independent process outside the WSIS’s intergovernmental political negotiation of the PrepCom.

Be objective and rational
The nature of this Working Group should not be regarded as a political negotiation, but it should be an objective study of the issues relevant to the Internet Governance. The result of the activities of the Working Group should be based on facts and technological, economical and social reasons outside political biases.

Be Transparent
We expect the Working Group should operate in a fully open and transparent manner. All minutes and other outputs of the official Working Group meetings should be made publicly available in major languages. The drafts of the reports at its interim and final stage must reflect the consideration of comments received and explain how those comments were taken into account.

3 General Structure

1) General Composition
We request that the structure of the Working Group should be composed so that the opinions of the following various stakeholders would be fully reflected.
a) Governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations.
b) Developing and developed economies of the world.
c) People in major regions of the world.
d) Users and providers of the Internet services.
e) Women and men.

The size of the Working Group should be a reasonable one to encompass the diversity and balance required as above, but in order to effective and efficient to produce the result within the given limited time, it should not be too large to accommodate everything.

We suggest to have 15 to 20 members for the efficiency, but in order to accommodate diversity, some 15 to 20 more people can be added as subcommittee members in their fields of expertise.

We suggest that the WG will have three co-chairs, one from each sector for mutual consensus and good division of labor.

2) Qualifications of the members
We suggest that members of the Working Group should have expertise in at least one of the following areas:
a) Technical filed
b) Policy area
c) Internet development and operation
d) Business development by Internet
e) Social service activities,
f) ICT for development in developing economies
g) End-users perspectives.

They should be able to sincerely devote sufficient amount of time for the real work themselves and to communicate with many parties interested in participating the process outside of the Working Group.

We also expect that upon selection of the members, a brief descriptive statement will be published that explains how each member meets the qualification requirements.

4 Working Methods
Open and closed meetings
We expect the Working Group will have face-to-face meetings as its core activity, supplemented by conference calls, online discussion among its members. While we recognize that closed meetings are the way to concentrate and produce actual work, we also strongly suggest holding an open consultation meeting prior to each major WG meeting. Regional and sub-regional open consultation meetings and other processes are also recommended.

We suggest the following measures to be taken to involve the broadest possible participation and promote mutual understandings overcoming language barriers.

a) Real-time capturing and display
Real-time capturing of the speeches in Open Consultation meetings and displaying them in the large screen, which is similar to the one exercised at ICANN meetings, in addition to the simultaneous interpretation to the major languages, as they are very helpful for non-native speakers of the working language.

b) Translation of official documents
We expect that the working language of the WG is in English (or major UN languages), but translation of official minutes and documents into major languages including into Japanese should be provided.

c) Contribution in any language should be accepted
Any language of the world should be accepted for all the comments and contributions submitted to the Working Group. The secretariat should publish them at the official website as their original form and translate them into major languages.

d) Voluntary translation platform
In case the above-mentioned translation of the contributions is difficult for the financial constraint, we suggest that the secretariat will select most important contributions through appropriate selection measures and translate them in full or summarized versions, and then provide a common platform that would allow voluntary translation of any document to be shared over the website. We are ready to suggest more specifics if requested.