A Petition from Civil Society to the Internet Governance Forum

To all fellow participants in the Internet Governance Forum:

We consider the IGF as one of the most important outcomes of the WSIS process, which promises to be an innovation in the arena of global governance; and we would like to express our strong appreciation for the value that the IGF brings to global policy arena and for the hard work of the Secretariat and the Advisory Group to date.

At the same time, in the spirit of shared responsibility for the success of this experiment, we would like to raise a few key issues to the attention of all fellow IGF participants and stakeholders, and ask for these points to be collectively received and implemented in Athens and beyond.

First of all, the first instance of the IGF has been conceived on the model of an international conference, with pre-arranged panelists instructing the audience on predefined themes, and limited opportunities for participants to express their views, or to raise other issues. While we appreciate the effort, we would like to ensure that any stakeholder has sufficient opportunities to express views, raise issues of concern, gather interest in them, and get them addressed at the IGF or forwarded to the appropriate venue. In other words, we would like to stress the importance of replacing top-down organizational models with bottom-up procedures, where a sufficient number of participants can put issues on the agenda and start working on them.

Ultimately, we see the IGF as a body that can also promote and confirm consensus on non-binding policy recommendations, as per part (g) of its mandate, given the legitimacy stemming from the Tunis agreements and from its special character as a network of equal stakeholders. We thus request the development of structures and processes for the IGF within which such deliberation may take place, enabling the IGF to fulfill its mandate given in paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda, including sub-paragraphs (c), (e), (g) and (k).

We suggest the IGF to develop, in an open and collaborative process, a structure of Working Groups around important issues and areas, which would work on an ongoing basis, through virtual as well as face-to-face means, and would report and be accountable to the IGF at large.

We see the need to increase the transparency and inclusiveness of IGF processes, opening these processes to receive the input of all stakeholders. Specifically, we think that stakeholder groups should be free to self-select their representatives in the IGF Advisory Group, under clearly defined, transparent and accountable procedures. All stakeholder groups identified in Tunis should be adequately represented in the Advisory Group; we note with dissatisfaction the limited presence of civil society nominees in the current Advisory Group.

We stress the need for provisions to cover the travel expenses of members from developing countries and other disadvantaged groups wishing to participate effectively in IGF deliberations, and for ensuring that the contributions of remote participants are accorded equal weight and authority as those of participants present in person.

The IGF as realized in Athens meets only a limited and insufficient part of its mandate as described by paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda. We thus call for the cooperation of all stakeholders to address this matter.

Sincerely submitted by the undersigned,