Veni Markovski veni.markovski at icann.org
Tue Nov 24 20:33:26 UTC 2015

Though your question is for Nigel - no, we are not sending these comments (draft) formally.

And I'd like to share some observations from New York.
ICANN is currently not on the agenda of any of the member states, and we believe this is good; after all WSIS is not about ICANN, it was not about ICANN, and there's no practical reason to believe that it will be about ICANN.

I have constant communication with the co-facilitators, and their assistants, and they are informed about what we do, how, etc.

Hope this address your question.

From: ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 15:26
To: Nigel Hickson <nigel.hickson at icann.org>; ccwg <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT OUTCOME DOCUMENT (WSIS+10 REVIEW)

Thanks for this update, Nigel!

I have briefly run through the original paper and the comments which you have proposed below and agree with the line taken. That said, I do not quite understand your message below: does it mean that you will NOT be sending the comments which are appended to this message to the process in an official manner, but rather will discuss the amendments with the co-facilitators orally?

Thanks for clarifying.

Kindest regards,

On 19/11/2015 09:47, Nigel Hickson wrote:
Good morning

Further to the below we decided it more appropriate to orally brief the Co-facilitators on our thoughts / concerns on the draft Outcome Document (ahead of the governmental discussions starting today). This Veni will do in New York.

He will draw upon, inter-alia, the following thoughts we had.

The assistants to the co-facilitators specifically noted at the IGF their willingness to hear thoughts, comments or suggestions on the Outcome Document; their contact details are

Elina Volksone   elina.volksone at mfa.gov.lv<mailto:elina.volksone at mfa.gov.lv>

Hana Sayed  Hashim Al Hashimi <hana.alhashimi at mofa.gov.ae<mailto:hana.alhashimi at mofa.gov.ae>




We are delighted to have this opportunity on commenting on the draft Outcome Document that was circulated by the Co-facilitators on 4th November. We were also fortunate in taking part in the excellent open forum session on the WSIS+10 Review at the IGF 2015 last week in Brazil.   The participation of the Co-facilitators was significant in this as was their generous agreement to circulate to the member State Missions a copy of the Session Report.

The draft Outcome Document, building on the earlier Zero Draft, is a substantial and  positive piece of work, both recognising the developments that have taken place in the ICT space since 2005and the real contribution that ICTs can make with respect to development and in particular the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals.  One applauds the attention given to this important linkage in the Document and the notion that the WSIS process, looking forward; should primarily concentrate on this nexus. Along with this focus we also applaud the references given to the need for an open and singular Internet; something which is vital for levering economic development and innovation.

We also support, and recognise the need for, factual references to how governance of the Internet has developed since the important agreements in the Tunis Agenda. We would, however, hope that this section might also look forward, referencing the   excellent dialogue taking place in many multi-stakeholder settings; not least the IGF.

Finally, we look forward to seeing a further draft before the final negotiation on the Resolution takes place before the UNGA Session in December.



1.  We would suggest that paragraph 8, clearly important in the recognition of the role ICTs have played, could be rephrased as follows:

"We welcome the remarkable evolution of ICTs and their enhanced diffusion, unseen 10 years ago, which has been underpinned by the contribution of all stakeholders, allowing ICT penetration into all corners of the globe, the growth of social media and innovative business models and enhanced contribution of ICTs to economic growth and development"

2.   In paragraph 12, we would suggest a slightly different approach in this paragraph; changing it to:  "We recognise that the Internet, as a global resource, is currently managed in an open, inclusive and transparent manner, which serves the public interest.  We affirm that such management should continue to be transparent and democratic involving all governments, the private sector, civil society, users and relevant international organisations" ;

ICT for Development

3. In paragraph 17 would suggest referencing national and regional economies as well as the global economy;

Internet Governance

4. In paragraph 50 we would suggest that at the start; the wording should be amended as follows: "We reaffirm that the governance of the Internet should continue to be transparent and democratic involving all governments, the private sector, civil society, users and relevant international organisations. We reiterate the working.........Internet".

5.  In paragraph 54 we think at the start the text should read:  "We acknowledge the unique role of the Internet Governance Forum as a successful and important platform......"

Enhanced Cooperation

6. In paragraph 55 we believe the factual status, as acknowledged in the CSTD "Mapping" exercise, should be reflected by the following text:  "We recognise the initiatives and processes adopted in various fora to allow the participation of governments, alongside other stakeholders, to carry out, on an equal footing their roles and responsibilities, in international..........

7.  In paragraph 56 we would suggest the following text:  "We acknowledge concerns that the appropriate involvement of governments in Internet Government public policy issues should be improved and thus call on Secretary General to provide a report to the 71st session of the General Assembly on the factual situation and, any, appropriate measures to enhance their involvement"

From: Nigel Hickson <nigel.hickson at icann.org<mailto:nigel.hickson at icann.org>>
Date: Tuesday 17 November 2015 18:41
To: ccwg <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>>
Cc: Renate DeWulf <renate.dewulf at icann.org<mailto:renate.dewulf at icann.org>>


Good evening.  Along with ISOC (and potentially other members of the Technical Community) ICANN is intending to submit some comments on the above draft (link below) to supplement the discussion at the IGF last week. Discussions between member Sates take place on this draft from 19th November.


Although the time is short would welcome any specific comments members may have.




ccwg-internet-governance mailing list

ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20151124/df98f480/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list