The global Internet governance architecture
Since India first made its proposal to establish a UN Committee for Internet-related Policies (UN CIRP), there have been repeated claims in the international media that the “UN is trying to take over the Internet”. Governments have indeed been trying to establish greater control over the Internet, both domestically and internationally. But need this necessarily be a bad thing, as it is often made out to be?
At the Internet Democracy Project, we believe that greater international coordination among governments at times is essential to safeguard the human rights of all Internet users, including in India. The problem lies, however, in the centralised nature of all proposals currently on the table to facilitate such coordination: whether they see the Internet Governance Forum or a new entity taking up this role, they all intend one body to become the ultimate clearing house for all Internet related policies at the global level.
In contrast, the Internet Democracy Project believes that the solution to global Internet governance challenges lies in the development of distributed, or networked forms of governance. At the heart of such a approach is the establishment of networks of governance actors and institutions, both domestically and internationally, who are linked in multiple ways and have a crucial stake in supporting and collaborating with each other: without the approval and agreement of others, no single actor can dominate the field.
In our work on the global Internet governance architecture, we develop these ideas step by step. We also follow closely two global processes in which the question of global Internet governance is addressed repeatedly and in some detail:
- The ITU and global Internet governance
- The WSIS+10 Review
This is in addition to the Internet Governance Forum and the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation, which we will be updating you about whenever relevant as well. More recently, the NetMundial meeting in Brazil in April 2014 has emerged as another important venue for these issues to be discussed.
More details about the the ITU-related processes and the WSIS+10 Review can be found under their respective sub-headings.
Posts & Publications
-
Data sovereignty, of whom? Limits and suitability of sovereignty frameworks for data in India
-
The seduction of data sovereignty in India
-
Dots and connections – Internet explained through rangoli
-
India’s data protection draft ignores key next-generation rights
-
Corporate actors must not facilitate human rights violations through new Chinese rules
-
India at the Internet’s root? Understanding India’s pitch for a root server
-
Cybersecurity, Internet governance and India’s foreign policy: Antecedents and the way forward for non-governmental stakeholders
-
Multistakeholderism in cybersecurity: What civil society brings uniquely
-
With or without us: Bilateralism and India’s cybersecurity policies
-
Putting people at the centre of the Information Society: Our comments on the WSIS+10 Draft Outcome Document
-
Joint statement on WSIS+10: Calling for an open preparatory process
-
Comparing the WSIS10 Draft Outcome Document with the Joint Civil Society comments on the Zero-Draft
-
Charting a concrete path for the future of the Information Society: Our comments on the WSIS+10 Zero-Draft
-
Importance of a rights-based approach to development needs to be recognised: Our comments on the WSIS+10 Non-Paper
-
Opportunism or glasnost? India’s embrace of multistakeholderism in Internet governance
-
The road to WSIS+10: Key perspectives from India
-
Pattaya Key Messages on the WSIS+10 Review: Voices from the Asia-Pacific region
-
Which direction for the WSIS+10 Review? Our preliminary submissions
-
Internet Democracy Project supports APC comments at UNGA Informal Stakeholder Consultations on WSIS+10 Review
-
We remain strongly committed to the goal of a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented information society
-
Digital India abroad: India’s foreign policy and digital rights
-
We need a UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Privacy!
-
Re-Interpreting Document 98: India’s proposals at the ITU Plenipot 2014 and the evolution of Internet governance
-
Statement on the Ten-Year Review of Progress Made in the Implementation of the Outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society
-
ITU Secretary-General response to members of civil society
-
Civil society open letter to the ITU on transparency of the 2014 ITU Plenipotentiary in Busan
-
What is the WSIS+10 Review and why does it matter? An introduction
-
Civil society statement on the 2014 Internet Governance Forum
-
Is a reconciliation of multistakeholderism and multilateralism in internet governance possible? India at NETmundial
-
Moving multistakeholderism forward: Four practical proposals
-
Moving multistakeholderism forward: Conceptual pointers from the working definition on Internet governance
-
Lyon Declaration on Access to Information and Development
-
Call for Internet and human rights concerns to be reflected in the Fortaleza Declaration of Sixth BRICS Summit
-
Civil society statement reflecting on the WSIS+10 High Level Event and the way forward
-
Assessing the WSIS+10 High Level Event Outcome Documents: What has been achieved?
-
Moving multistakeholderism forward: Lessons from the NETmundial
-
NETmundial submission: Institutional mechanisms for the further evolution of the Internet governance ecosystem
-
NETmundial submission: Internet governance principles and human rights
-
Recommendations to the third meeting of the UN CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation
-
Open letter by Indian civil society organisations to the Chair of the ‘Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance’ to be held in Brazil in April, 2014
-
Letter to co-facilitators calling for civil society input into negotiations on WSIS+10 modalities
-
Submission to Brazil meeting committees on deliberative processes for the Brazil meeting
-
Unlocking enhanced cooperation
-
Is India reviving its proposal for a multilateral UN body to take over the governance of the Internet?
-
Civil society statement regarding the 2014 Internet Governance Summit in Brazil
-
How to ensure a safe and secure Internet? Not cyber ethics but human rights and multistakeholderism are the answer
-
A third way? Proposal for a decentralised, multistakeholder global Internet governance model
-
Letter from international civil society organisations to President Dilma Rousseff in support of her statement at the 68th Session of the UNGA
-
Our submission to the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation
-
Pawns in a governments’ game? Civil society and evolving discussions on ‘multistakeholder’ Internet governance
-
Civil society proposal to open participation in the ITU’s Council Working Group on Internet-related Public Policy Issues
-
Closing statement from civil society to the WTPF
-
Reframing the debate: Cyber security, cyber surveillance and online human rights
-
Mechanics and governance of the Internet – #EROTICSIndia
-
Open letter to Secretary General Touré on WTPF
-
The WCIT’s outcomes: an Indian civil society perspective
-
WCIT 2012: India sets an example
-
Open letter to the ITU: Remove barriers to civil society participation!
-
The WCIT and the ITRs: An FAQ
-
Concerns and suggestions for alternative language with regard to the Government of India’s draft proposal for the ITRs
-
Statement on the proposed ITRs by civil society members and groups participating in the ‘Best Bits’ pre-IGF meeting at Baku
-
“Dear ITU”: Indian civil society on the proposed ITRs and related processes
-
Saying no to ITU authority over the Internet
-
Are we breaking up the Internet, one country at a time?