LACNIC’s Thoughts on WCIT

December 28, 2012

The World Conference on International Telecommunications of the International Telecommunication Union, also known as WCIT, has finally come to an end.

After more than a year’s work on analyzing proposals, talking to governments and participating in preparatory discussions, the conclusion of this meeting leaves us with mixed feelings.

On a positive note, plenary sessions were broadcast over the Internet and thus provided an opportunity for thousands of people around the world to follow the discussions live.

On the negative side, it must be noted that several key sessions were restricted to government representatives and did not allow the presence of any observers, not even ITU sector members (non-government members). In addition, confusing voting procedures that did not contribute to transparency or to the search for consensus were followed on important issues such as the Resolution on Internet topics.

(Free access, no subscription required)

As an intergovernmental body, the ITU and/or its member states have the right to restrict participation, but it is clear that these practices are not consistent with the Information Society’s terms nor with the demands for transparency and openness expressed by multiple stakeholders. Those organizations that do not evolve towards a more open and participatory model risk having their legitimacy questioned in the near future. Those such as LACNIC who actively participate in Internet discussions both at regional as well as at global level sincerely hope that the ITU will show signs of greater openness in the future, as this will undoubtedly result in greater involvement of all stakeholders.

Given the fact that the International Telecommunication Regulations had not been modified since 1988, promoting their update is understandable. LACNIC believes that the agreed text for the new treaty is very reasonable and acceptable; notwithstanding, we would like to express our opinion that items 5A and 5B, which deal with Security and Unsolicited Communications, should not have been included in the treaty, as they do not add any significant aspects to the agreement and, in addition, the ambiguity of their wording might result in countries with a weak tradition of respect for human rights using them as a way to legitimize restrictions on Internet freedoms.

It is important to reaffirm our organization’s conviction that, although we strongly believe that governments and international organizations should be active participants in Internet Governance, according to the letter and the spirit of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) are not the proper environment to address Internet related issues.

0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments