1. Internet Governance After the 2012 World Conference on International Telecommunication Regulations

2. 2 What does ICANN do?

3. 3  A bit on ICANN  A resume of the 2012 World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT)  Looking forward  Questions Agenda

4. 4 Multi-stakeholder Model

5. 5 Serious about Internationalization  Moving the “centre of gravity” from LA  Not just a case of opening offices (but this as well)  A new thinking  But new resources to be deployed

6. 6  I* Organizations  Inter-Governmental Organizations (ITU, OECD, UN, World Bank…)  ICANN Community  Regional Organizations (European Union, African Union…)  Business Organizations (ICC; Digital Europe, CBI)  Users…. Internationalization / Engagement – Who

7. 7  Through Regional VPs and Stakeholder Engagement Team;  Working with ISOC/ RIRs etc  Through GAC; ccTLD; gNSO and ALAC;  Through Regional ccTLD bodies and Regional At-Large Organizations (RALOs)  Through business associations and civil society  Specific Working Groups (Africa strategy) Internationalization / Engagement – How

8. 8  The Facts  The Process  Substance  Lessons Learned A Resume of WCIT

9. 9  New Treaty will become effective on 1 January 2015 for those countries that sign and ratify it  The Resolutions had affect from 14 December 2012  The ITR (1988) will continue to apply to those not signing  89 signed Treaty; 55 did not (but some still may)  Member States can sign with reservations (some will) The Facts

10. 10  Council preparation phase; PP-10 Resolution and Council Report made little difference  Majority of debate on proposals submitted in last six months  ITU engineered partial transparency  Dialogue dominated completely by Member States and Regional Grouping  Use of “secret” sessions a problem  A “vote” made up mind of vast majority of non- signers The Process – How we got to WCIT and Refined ITR

11. 11  Preamble – Human Rights and “Right of Access”  Article 1 – “Operating Agencies” and Content  Article 2 – Nothing on ICT  Article 3 - Internet Exchange Points; kept out Addressing and Naming (3.5) and Non- discriminatory Access  Article 4 – Roaming Transparency and competition  Article 5A – Security -domestic and international  Substance (1)

12. 12  Article 5B – Unsolicited communications  Article 8A – Energy Efficiency / e-waste  Article 8B – Accessibility  Resolution 1 Landlocked Countries  Resolution 2 Number for Access to Emergency Services  Resolution 3 Internet  Resolution 4 Periodic Review of ITR  Resolution 5 Traffic Exchange Substance (2)

13. 13  Community (business / technical) worked well together  Chairing quality critical  Many countries undecided – lot of work to do Lessons Learned

14. 14  World Telecommunications Policy Forum (WTPF) | May 2013  ITU Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-14)  World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) Review | Starting now Looking Forward

15. 15  May; 2013; Geneva  ITU Conference - Advisory Nature  Issue is Internet Governance  “Opinions” will be adopted  Will influence international dialogue World Telecommunications Policy Forum

16. 16  South Korea in November 2014  Change of guard  Opportunity for changes to ITU mandate  Crucial for ITU and the Internet ITU Plenipotentiary- PP-14

17. 17  10 year UN Review – mandated in Tunis Agenda adopted at WSIS  Focus on overall affect of WSIS on global access and connectivity;  UNESCO (WSIS+10) Conference in Paris; February 2013  ITU; WSIS Event- Egypt; 2014  United Nations General Assembly Review in 2015? WSIS (1) - Process

18. 18  Whether the multi-stakeholder approach for Internet Governance (Adopted in Tunis Agenda) has benefited society  Have governments been allowed to play an appropriate role?  Does Tunis Agenda need reviewing?  What’s at stake?  Should UN /ITU take over the DNS / ICANN? WSIS (2) - Questions

19. 19  Multi-stakeholder model works well for Internet Governance  It promotes innovation around the globe Conclusion

20. QUESTIONS / DISCUSSION