Message 01772 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT01772 Message: 1/2 L0 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

[ox-en] Civil society on WSIS



Hi!

Find included a text I received a month ago (as .doc). I.e. it was
quite before the actual WSIS. However, I think the text is nonetheless
interesting because IMHO it reveals how little the civil society did
grasp the concept of information society - just as the states. I mean
every point in here could be made on any summit. IMHO only point 10 is
really specific to the information society. The rest applies to
industry society as well.

Also see the second included text where the civil society says it
leaves the process.

Note, that all this is a bit old. However, I'm sure the content did
not change since that time.


						Mit Freien Grüßen

						Stefan

--- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< ---
Civil Society Essential Benchmarks for WSIS

The essential benchmarks listed in this document reflect work in
progress by the civil society content and themes group of the WSIS
process. While there is consensus on the priorities stated here this
document does not represent absolute consensus, nor does the order of
the essential benchmarks constitute a strict ranking in order of
importance. For more information on the WSIS CS CT group, contact:
Sally Burch


1.      Introduction

The approach to the "Information Society" on which the WSIS has been
based reflects, to a large extent, a narrow understanding in which
ICTs means telecommunications and the Internet. This approach has
marginalised key issues relating to the development potential inherent
in the combination of knowledge and technology and thus conflicts with
the broader development mandate given in UNGA Resolution 56/183.

Civil society is committed to a people-centred, inclusive approach
based on respect for human rights principles and development
priorities. We believe these principles and priorities should be
embedded throughout the WSIS Declaration of Principles and Action
Plan. This paper sets out the benchmarks against which civil society
will assess the outcomes of the WSIS process and the commitment of all
stakeholders to achieving its mandate.

2.      Human rights

The WSIS Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action, should take as
their foundations the international human rights framework. This
implies the full integration, concrete application and enforcement of
civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including
labour rights, the right to development, as well as the principle of
non-discrimination. The universality, indivisibility, interrelatedness
and interdependence of all human rights should be clearly recognized,
together with their centrality to democracy and the rule of law.

All Principles of the Declaration and all activities in the Action
Plan, should be in full compliance with international human rights
standards, which should prevail over national legislative frameworks.
The "information society" must not result in any discrimination or
deprivation of human rights resulting from the acts or omissions of
governments or of non-state actors under their jurisdictions. Any
restriction on the use of ICTs must pursue a legitimate aim under
international law, be prescribed by law, be strictly proportionate to
such an aim, and be necessary in a democratic society.

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is of
fundamental and specific importance to the information society,
requiring that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and
expression and the right to seek, receive and impart information and
ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

3.      Poverty reduction and the Right to Development

Given the unequal distribution of wealth among and within nations, the
struggle against poverty should be the top priority on the agenda of
the World Summit on the Information Society.  It is not possible to
achieve sustainable development by embracing new communication
technologies without challenging existing inequalities.

Civil society organisations from different parts of the world unite in
their call to governments to take this matter very seriously.  We want
to emphasise that challenging poverty requires more than setting of
'development agendas'. It requires the commitment of significant
financial and other resources, linked with social and digital
solidarity, channeled through existing and new financing mechanisms
that are managed transparently and inclusively of all sectors of
society.

4.      Sustainable development

An equitable Information Society must be shaped by the needs of people
and communities and based on sustainable economic, social development
and democratic principles, including the Millennium Development Goals.

Only development that embraces the principles of social justice and
gender equality can be said to centrally address fundamental social,
cultural and economic divides. Market-based development solutions
often fail to address more deep-rooted and persistent inequalities in
and between countries of the North and South.

Democratic and sustainable development of in the information society
can therefore not be left solely to market forces and the propagation
of technology. In order to balance commercial objectives with
legitimate social interests, recognition should be given to the need
for responsibility of the public sector, appropriate regulation and
development of public services, and the principle of equitable and
affordable access to services.

People and communities must be empowered to develop their own
solutions within the information society, in particular to fight
poverty and to participate in development through fully democratic
processes that allow community access to and participation in
decision-making.

5.  Social Justice

5.1  Gender Equality

An equitable and inclusive Information Society must be based on gender
justice and be particularly guided by the interpretation of principles
of gender equality, non-discrimination and women's empowerment as
contained in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and the
CEDAW Convention. The Action Plan must demonstrate a strong commitment
to an intersectional approach to redressing discrimination resulting
from unequal power relations at all levels of society. To empower
girls and women throughout their life cycle, as shapers and leaders of
society, gender responsive educational programs and appropriate
learning environments need to be promoted. Gender analysis and the
development of both quantitative and qualitative indicators in
measuring gender equality through an extensive and integrated national
system of monitoring and evaluation are "musts".

5.2  Disability

Specific needs and requirements of all stakeholders, including those
with disabilities, must be considered in ICT development.
Accessibility and inclusiveness of ICTs is best done at an early stage
of design, development and production, so that the Information Society
is to become the society for all, at minimum cost.

5.3  Labour rights

Essential human rights, such as privacy, freedom of expression, and
the right of trade unions to communicate with employees, should be
respected in the workplace. ICTs are progressively changing our way of
working and the creation of a secure, safe and healthy working
environment , appropriate to the utilisation of ICTs, respecting core
labour standards, is fundamental. ICTs should be used to promote
awareness of, respect for and enforcement of universal human rights
standards and core labor standards.

5.4 Indigenous Peoples

The evolution of the Information Society must be founded on the
respect and promotion of the recognition of the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples and their distinctiveness as outlined in the ILO Convention
169 and the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
They have fundamental rights to protect, preserve and strengthen their
own identity and cultural diversity. ICT's should be used to support
and promote the rights of Indigenous Peoples to exercise full
ownership and control over their cultural, intellectual and so-called
natural resources.

6.  Literacy, Education and Research

Literacy and free universal access to education is a key principle.
All initiatives must embrace this principle and respond to needs of
all. Knowledge societies require an informed and educated citizenry.
Capacity building needs to include skills to use ICTs, media and
information literacy, and the skills needed for active citizenship
including the ability to find, appraise, use and create information
and technology. Approaches that are local, horizontal,
gender-responsive and socially-driven and mediated should be
prioritised. A combination of traditional and new media as well as
open access to knowledge and information should be encouraged.

7.  Cultural and linguistic diversity

Communications media and information technologies have a particularly
important role to play in sustaining and developing the world's
cultures and languages. The implementation of this principle requires
support for a plurality of means of information and communication and
respect for cultural and linguistic diversity, as outlined in UNESCO's
Declaration on Cultural Diversity.

8. Access and Infrastructure

Global universal access to communication and information should be a target of the WSIS action plan and the expansion of the global information infrastructure should be based on principles of equality and partnership and guided by rules of fair competition and regulation at both national and international levels.  The integration of access, infrastructure and training of the citizenry and the generation of local content, in a framework of social networks and clear public or private policies, is a key basis for the development of egalitarian and inclusive information societies.  The evolution of policy should be coordinated internationally but enable a diversity of appropriate solutions based on national and regional input and international sharing of information and resources. This should be people-centered and process-orientated, rather than technologically determined and expert dominated.

9.      Governance and enabling environment

9.1     Democratic governance

Good governance in a democratic society implies openness,
transparency, accountability, and compliance with the rule of law.
Respect for these principles is needed to enforce the right to take
part in the conduct of public affairs. Public access to information
produced or maintained by governments should be enforced, ensuring
that the information is timely, complete and accessible in a format
and language the public can understand. This also applies to access to
information produced or maintained by corporations where this relates
to activities affecting the public interest.

9.2     Media

While allowing for government information services to communicate
their message, state-controlled media at the national level should be
transformed into editorially independent public service media
organisations and/or privatised. Efforts which encourage pluralism and
diversity of media ownership must be encouraged to avoid excessive
media concentration

9.3  Community media

Community media, that is media which are independent, community-driven
and civil-society based, have a specific and crucial role to play in
enabling access and participation for all to the information society,
especially the poorest and most marginalised communities. Community
media should be supported and promoted. Governments should assure that
legal frameworks for community media are non-discriminatory and
provide for equitable allocation of frequencies through transparent
and accountable mechanisms.

9.4     Internet governance

The global governance of ICT must be based on the values of open
participation, inclusiveness, transparency, and democratic
accountability. It should establish and support universal
participation in addressing new international policy and technical
issues raised by the Internet and ICT.  No single body and no single
stakeholder group is able to manage all of the issues alone. Many
stakeholders, cooperating in strict accordance with widely supported
rules and procedures, must define the global agenda.

The non-government sector has played a historically critical role in
Internet Governance, and this must be recognized. The strength of the
Internet as an open non-Government platform should be reinforced, with
an explicit and stronger role for Civil Society.  The role of
Governments should be no greater than that of any other stakeholder
group.

10      Public Domain of Global Knowledge

10.1     Limited intellectual monopolies

Human knowledge, including the knowledge of all peoples and
communities, also those who are remote and excluded, is the heritage
of all humankind and the reservoir from which new knowledge is
created. A rich public domain is essential to inclusive information
societies. Limited intellectual monopolies, such as copyrights or
patents, are granted only for the benefit of society, most notably to
encourage creativity and innovation. The benchmark against which they
must be reviewed and adjusted regularly is how well they fulfill their
purpose.

10.2     Free Software

Software is the cultural technique of the digital age and access to it
determines who may participate in a digital world. Free Software with
its freedoms of use for any purpose, studying, modification and
redistribution is an essential building block for an empowering,
sustainable and inclusive information society. No software model
should be forbidden or negatively regulated, but Free Software should
be promoted for its unique social, educational, scientific, political
and economic benefits and opportunities.

10.3 Access to information in the public domain

Today, more than 80% of mankind has no access to the reservoir of
human knowledge that is the public domain and from which our new
knowledge is created. Their intellectual power remains
uninitialized and consequently unused, lost to all humankind. The
reservoir of human knowledge must be made equally available to all in
online and  offline media by means of Free Documentation, public
libraries and other initiatives to disseminate information.

10.4 Open access to scientific information

Free scientific information is a requirement for sustainable
development. Science is the source of the technological
development that empowers the Information Society, including the World
Wide Web. In the best tradition of science, scientific authors donate
their work to humankind and therefore, it must be equally available to
all, on the Web, in online Open Access journals and online Open
Archives.


11.     Security and privacy

11.1    Integrity and security

Definitions of criminal and terrorist purposes in existing and
emerging policies and legislation are ambiguous and prevent the use of
information resources for legitimate purposes. The legitimate need for
infrastructure integrity must avoid shift to the highly politicized
agenda characterized by language referring to the integrity of the
military field and the use of information resources for criminal and
terrorist purposes.

11.2    Right to privacy

The right to privacy should be affirmed in the context of the
information society. It must be defended in public spaces, online,
offline, at home and in the workplace. Every person must have the
right to decide freely whether and in what manner he or she wants to
receive information and communicate with others. The possibility of
communicating anonymously must be ensured for everyone. The
collection, retention, use and disclosure of personal data, no matter
by whom, should remain under the control of the individual concerned.
The power of the private sector and governments over personal data,
including monitoring and surveillance, increases the risk of abuse,
and must be kept to a minimum under clearly specified, legal
conditions.

--- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< ---
 Civil Society Statement
at the End of the Preparatory Process
for the World Summit on the Information Society
Geneva, November 14, 2003

I. Where do we stand now?

We have come to the last day of PrepCom 3a. This extra week of preparatory work was neccessary after governments failed to reach agreement during the supposed final preparatory conference in September 2003. In spite of the extra expenditure of time and money, the deadlock continues - and sets in already on the very first article of the declaration, where governments are not able to agree on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, as the common foundation of the summit declaration.

Through our observation of the process we have identified two main problem areas that impede progress in the WSIS:

1.How to correct imbalances in riches, imbalances of rights, imbalances of power, or imbalances of access. In particular, governments do not agree on even the principle of a financial effort to overcome the so-called Digital Divide; this is all the more difficult to accept given that the summit process was started two years ago with precisely that objective.

2.The struggle over human rights. Not even the basis of human life in dignity and equality, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, finds support as the basis for the Information Society. Governments are not able to agree on a comittment to basic human right standards as the basis for the Information Society, most prominent in this case being the freedom of expression.

These are the essential conflicts among governments, as we see them now. There is also ongoing fight over issues such as media, internet governance, limited intellectual monopolies such as copyright, Free Software, security and so on. This underlines our assessment that there is a lack of a common vision.

II. Realpolitik or New Vision?

The underlying struggle we see here is the old world of governments and traditional diplomacy confronting challenges and realities of the 21st century.

We recognize the problems governments face in trying to address a range of difficult, complex and politically divisive issues in the two summit documents.

But this situation just reflects power struggles that we are seeing around the world. A number of governments realize that much is at stake, and they are responding defensively and nervously. They have noticed that they can not control media content or transborder information flows anymore, nor can they lock the knowledge of the world in the legal system of so-called "intellectual property".

Some governments are not prepared.

They fear the power of new technologies and the way people are using them to network, to create new forms of partnerships and collaboration, to share experiences and knowledge locally and globally.

This, combined with the fear and security paranoia of the past two years, compounds political uncertainty and is also played out in the WSIS process.

But: Do we want to base our vision of the information society on fear and uncertainty or on curiosity, compassion and the spirit of looking forward?

The WSIS process has slowly but constantly been moving from "information" to "society". It was started with a technocratic infrastructure-oriented perspective in the ITU. We are proud to say that we were crucial in bringing home the idea that in the end, the information society is about people, the communication society is about social processes, and the knowledge society is about society's values. In the end, it is not digital - it is dignity that counts.

The whole process has shown a lack of interest among some governments in forming a common vision for the information society. It is not clear if this was ever the agenda. Probably governments are just not prepared to draft a vision anyway. They are not good at that.


III. The limits of good faith

This is the first time that civil society has participated in such a way in a summit preparation process. We have worked very hard to include issues that some did not expect to be included. We have had some successes, while in a number of areas we were not heard or even listened to.

If the governments want to agree, they can agree in 5 minutes. We now have the feeling that there is no political will to agree on a common vision.

Therefore we will now stop giving input to the intergovernmental documents. Our position is that we do not want to endorse documents that represent the lowest common denominator among governments - if there will be anything like that.

We have produced essential benchmarks - our ethical framework - of which we present the latest version today. The governments risk overlooking these key issues in the hairsplitting and compromise of negotiations if they do not take into account our input  more seriously.

The current stalemate deepens our belief in the need for the inclusion of all stakeholders in decision-making processes. Where rulers cannot reach consensus, the voices of civil society, communities and citizens can and should provide guidance.


IV. Bringing back vision into the process

We don't need governments's permission. We take our own responsibility. Someone has to take the lead, if governments won't do it, civil society will do it.

We have now started to draft our own vision document as the result of a two-year, bottom-up, transparent and inclusive online and offline discussion process among civil society groups from all over the world.

We will present our vision at the summit in Geneva in December 2003.  We invite all interested parties, from all sectors of society, to join us in open discussion and debate in a true multi-stakeholder process.

New mechanisms and structures are possible and can resolve these impasses and enable people to work together globally and inclusively.


V. Looking beyond Geneva

Without funding and real political commitment from governments, there is no real Action Plan today. But the present draft provides an agenda, a list of issues of common concern.

Governments know they cannot address these issues alone. Any mechanism for the period following Geneva that does not closely associate civil society and other stakeholders is not only unacceptable in principle, it is also doomed to fail.

Like many other actors, including some governments, we do not want the opportunities offered by the unique gathering in Geneva to be wasted. We hope to find substantial improvement for the phase leading us to the second phase of the summit in 2005.

This process is going so badly, someone has to take the initiative to save it from destruction. If governments don't - we today declare ourselves ready to assume this important responsibility with all actors sharing our concerns.

Irrespective of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society in December 2003, civil society will continue what we have been doing all the time: Doing our work, implementing and renewing our vision, working together in local and global bottom-up processes  - and thereby shaping a shared and inclusive knowledge society.


_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/



Thread: oxenT01772 Message: 1/2 L0 [In index]
Message 01772 [Homepage] [Navigation]