<html>
<body>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<div align="right"><font face="@SimSun" size=5 color="#008080"><b>
Bangladesh NGOs Network for<br>
Radio and Communication<br>
</b></font><font face="Arial Narrow, Helvetica" size=1>Promoting
Communication Technology for a Fairer World<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
</font></div>
<font face="@SimSun" size=3 color="#0000FF"><b>Dear Madam/Sir,<br>
</b></font><font face="@SimSun" size=3>Greetings from Bangladesh NGOs
Network for Radio and Communication(BNNRC).<br>
We fully support the </font>APC statement on the second Internet
Governance Forum<br>
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.<br><br>
<font face="@SimSun" size=3>With best regads,<br><br>
<br>
</font><b>Bazlu<br><br>
<font face="Courier New, Courier" size=3 color="#800000">
--------------------<br>
</font><font face="System" size=3 color="#0000FF">AHM Bazlur
Rahman-S21BR<br>
Chief Executive Officer<br>
</font><font face="System" size=3 color="#008080">Bangladesh NGOs Network
for Radio and Communication<br>
&<br>
Member, Strategy Council<br>
UN-Global Alliance for ICT and Development (UN GAID)<br><br>
</font><font face="System" size=3 color="#800080">House: 13/1, Road:2,
Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207 <br>
Post Box: 5095, Dhaka 1205 Bangladesh<br><br>
</font><font face="System" size=3 color="#0000FF">Phone: 88-02-9130750,
88-02-9138501<br>
01711881647 Fax: 88-02-9138501-105<br><br>
</font><font face="System" size=3>E-mail: ceo@bnnrc.net,
bnnrc@bd.drik.net, <br>
<a href="http://www.bnnrc.net/" eudora="autourl">www.bnnrc.net<br><br>
<br>
</a></b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">APC statement on
the second Internet Governance Forum<br>
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil<br>
November 12-15 2007<br><br>
15 November 2007<br><br>
RIO DE JANEIRO, 15 November 2007 As the second <br>
Internet Governance Forum (IGF) draws to a close, <br>
the Association for Progressive Communications <br>
(APC) is taking stock and formulating suggestions <br>
for action, as a way to move the IGF forward.<br><br>
The Rio IGF, like the first IGF, succeeded as a <br>
space for inclusive policy dialogue. The openness <br>
of the format of the event, and the quality and <br>
diversity of the participants created an <br>
opportunity for reaching common understanding of <br>
complex and controversial issues. It builds <br>
understanding of differences in positions and <br>
opinions. It is this that enables the IGF to <br>
influence and inform policy without the <br>
constraints of needing to create consensus on negotiated text.<br><br>
We appreciate the impressive effort of the <br>
Brazilian Internet Steering Group in organising <br>
the event, and in particular want to recognise <br>
their inclusion of civil society organisations in the preparatory
process.<br><br>
This being said, the IGF can and should make <br>
further progress in fulfilling its mandate. Here <br>
are APC’s suggestions to the IGF for consolidating its
mechanism.<br><br>
- Establish a self-regulatory mechanism to ensure <br>
participation, access to information and <br>
transparency in internet governance: APC <br>
recommends that a mechanism is created to ensure <br>
that all the institutions which play a role in <br>
some aspect of governing the internet commit to <br>
ensuring transparency, public participation, <br>
including participation of all stakeholders, and <br>
access to information in their activities.<br><br>
- Establish regional and national IGFs: Listening <br>
to the proposals of many Latin American and <br>
African delegates, including from leading <br>
governments and the private sector, APC would <br>
like to support the idea of establishing regional <br>
IGFs to define regional priorities and to enable <br>
greater participation from developing countries. <br>
. We also believe that national IGFs are a <br>
powerful mechanism for learning, problem solving, <br>
collective action and building partnership among <br>
different stakeholders at national level.<br><br>
- Convene ‘IGF Working Groups’: APC recommends <br>
that the IGF uses the format of the WGIG, or <br>
bodies such as the IETF (Internet Engineering <br>
Task Force) to convene working groups to address <br>
complex issues that emerge during a forum. These <br>
groups can be made up of individuals with the <br>
necessary expertise, and drawn from different <br>
stakeholder groups. These groups can then engage <br>
specific issues in greater depth, and, if they <br>
feel it is required, develop recommendations that <br>
can be communicated to the internet community at <br>
large, or addressed to specific institutions. .<br><br>
These recommendations need not be presented as <br>
formally agreed recommendations from the IGF, but <br>
as recommendations or suggestions for action from <br>
the individuals in the Working Group.These <br>
working groups have a different role from the <br>
self-organised dynamic coalitions which we believe should
continue.<br><br>
Based on discussions at the IGF II it appears <br>
that working groups on the following five issues <br>
might be valuable: a) WG on the definition of <br>
illegal and harmful content; d) WG on self and <br>
co-regulation in internet governance; c) WG on <br>
business models for access; d) WG on a <br>
development agenda for internet governance; e) WG on open
standards.<br><br>
- Effectively resource the IGF secretariat: We <br>
want to express our admiration of Markus Kummer <br>
and his team for accomplishing so much with so <br>
little human and financial resources. We <br>
recognise the extensive investment made by the <br>
government of Brazil, and also by the previous <br>
host country, Greece, as well as other <br>
contributions made by governments, sponsors and <br>
donors. However, if the IGF is to continue to <br>
succeed and make further strides in fulfilling <br>
its mandate, the secretariat needs to be properly <br>
resourced. The United Nations needs to recognise <br>
that the IGF is the outcome of a UN process and <br>
should ensure that it has the resources it needs <br>
to fulfil its mandate as defined at the Tunis Summit in 2005.<br><br>
- Strengthen the capacity and legitimacy of the <br>
Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Group: We recommend <br>
that one third of the membership of the <br>
Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Group rotates every <br>
year; that it is formally appointed by Secretary <br>
General by the end of January of every year; that <br>
the mandate of the MAG is clarified and that it <br>
considers electing some form of management <br>
committee to streamline its internal <br>
decision-making processes. We recognise the right <br>
of the MAG to have closed discussions (Chatham <br>
House Rules) but it needs to adhere to basic <br>
principles of transparency and accountability. We <br>
propose that the MAG provides routine reports on its meetings and
decisions.<br><br>
- On the thematic areas of the IGF, acknowledging <br>
that access, openness, security, critical <br>
internet resources and diversity have been <br>
explored extensively, APC does not see the value <br>
in recycling these themes in the plenary format. <br>
We encourage the IGF III organisers to consider a <br>
different format for the plenary panels. Such a <br>
format should allow for in depth discussion of <br>
specific issues and can draw on the outcomes of <br>
workshops and inputs of working groups.<br><br>
- Increase participation in agenda setting: We <br>
suggest that the IGF secretariat and the MAG <br>
(Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group) convene <br>
working groups for each of the main themes of the <br>
next forum to help shape the agenda and identify <br>
speakers well in advance of the event. These <br>
groups can assist the MAG and the secretariat to <br>
address gender balance and diversity in the composition of the
panels.<br><br>
- Learning from experience: We encourage the <br>
secretariat and the hosts of the first two IGFs, <br>
Greece and Brazil, to engage in active sharing of <br>
lessons learned with the next host country of the <br>
IGF, India. This process should include <br>
representatives of all stakeholder groups.<br><br>
In conclusion, we would like to extend our thanks <br>
to the host people and government, the Executive <br>
Coordinator of the IGF secretariat and its <br>
chairperson, and all participants. We wish India <br>
well in it's preparations for IGF III and express <br>
our commitment to the process and willingness to <br>
provide support in the process where we can.<br><br>
The Association for Progressive Communications<br>
Rio de Janeiro, 15 November 2007<br><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Plenary mailing list<br>
Plenary@wsis-cs.org<br>
<a href="http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/plenary" eudora="autourl">
http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/plenary</a>
</blockquote></body>
</html>