By Shravanti Reddy
Digital Freedom NetworkThe Digital Freedom Network's monthly Food for Thought conversation series offers an opportunity for informal discussion on the use of technology in human rights work. The purpose of the Food for Thought series is to facilitate networking among like-minded organizations and individuals and provide a platform for information exchange on technological uses, needs and trends throughout the world. The April 16, 2003 meeting, held at DFN's offices in New York City, focused on the role of non-governmental organizations working in the field of human rights and development in the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS).
A two-part United Nations conference, WSIS will bring together representatives from government, business and civil society to discuss the major social and economic challenges that are resulting from the use of new technologies. With the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) mandated with organizing WSIS, the first meeting will be held in Geneva, Switzerland from December 10-12 , 2003 followed by a second meeting in Tunis, Tunisia in November 2005.
To facilitate the discussion, DFN invited two individuals to discuss civil society participation in the context of WSIS:
Ramin Shahzamani, Technical Consultant with the World Federalist Movement (WFM) and the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC) WFM is an international citizen's movement working for justice, peace, and sustainable prosperity. It works to strengthen and democratize world institutions. The CICC is a coalition of 2,000 NGOs that work towards the establishment of the ICC and to ensure that it is an effective and independent body.
Nan Rubin, Founder of Community Media Services Nan has been providing technical and organizational planning to public broadcasting stations, independent producers, media organizations and grassroots groups for more than twenty years. She is working with groups that involve communications rights and local media inititiaves as they relate to WSIS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The principles of WSIS are informed by the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDG), a broad set of economic and social development goals set out by the UN Secretary-General to bridge the gap between the developed and less developed nations by the end of this millennium. While WSIS is being organized by the ITU, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is also playing a part which is important in terms of human rights because it relates the process to a cultural environment.
The major stakeholders in the WSIS process include governments, the private sector and civil society. Five regional conferences have already taken place in Mali, Romania, Japan, Dominican Republic and Lebanon that addressed the specific issues of each region and helped to localize the dialogue. There have also been two Preparatory Committees (PrepComs) leading up to the meeting in December at which the various stakeholders came together to begin the dialogue and decide on objectives for the summit. A third and final PrepCom is scheduled to be held in Geneva in September 2003.
During the first PrepCom, stakeholders were trying to get a grasp of the process and understand where it was leading. They were also forming collaborations with like-minded organizations and learning how to organize around these issues. At the second PrepCom, the NGO community was stronger and more cohesive. Their outreach efforts were more organized and they communicated better with the governments, the private sector, and among themselves.
The outcome of WSIS will be a clear statement of political will and a plan of action to bridge the gap between the have and have-nots in the global information and communications network. During the second Prepcom, two draft documents, a Declaration of Principles and a Plan of Action, were produced. Both of these documents are still works-in-progress that will be finalized during the first meeting of WSIS.
Within the draft Declaration of Principles, there is very progressive language in terms of a human rights perspective. It references the special requirements of developing countries and an equitable information society. It also refers to the preservation of the rights within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in particular Article 19.
The draft Plan of Action correlates to the points in the Declaration of Principles and is concerned with their implementation. It is in essence what governments and the various stakeholders agree to implement. The language of the Plan of Action was found to be very weak. It is mostly geared towards establishing technology infrastructures, which are admittedly important components, but there is very little language that takes into account the principles of democracy, accountability and transparency.
Although WSIS is a two-part conference-a unique set up for such a meeting-this does not mean that stakeholders must wait until the second phase has concluded to take action on these issues. After the first meeting, governments will go back to their respective countries for reactions and feedback with the dialogue continuing until the meeting in 2005. However, the Plan of Action indicates that implementation should begin during the next two years. In fact, activity on these issues has been taking place for many years irrespective of WSIS and will continue to do, so. WSIS is merely formalizing the process and making the stakeholders agree to certain processes and principles.
While a lot of important work takes place outside of the actual Summit, mostly during the PrepComs and the dialogue during the inter-sessional periods, it is unclear if the conference in December will merely be a rubber stamp of what has already been decided during the PrepComs. However, the fact that there are two phases to the WSIS process suggests that the meeting in December should be seen as the beginning of the process, an opening of the door, while the second meeting in Tunis will focus on results. There are several years in which to assess what shape the process is taking and to create forums that will continue to shape the final documents.
The WSIS documents are not treaties and therefore will not have any binding force on governments. With no one identified to execute these ideas and no additional money earmarked for these activities, it is unclear how these principles will be achieved.
Perhaps it is merely an exercise for NGOs and governments and will not have much of a lasting impact on what actually transpires in the future. A cynic would say that the powerful nations and corporations will do as they like and that WSIS is merely a way to make people feel as though they have an impact.
It appeared to some that international decisions are often based on US domestic interests and therefore NGOs need to concentrate on influencing decision-making within US government and corporate structure. US opposition to certain international decisions and actions has made them difficult to implement or overcome.
However, the point was made that while US opposition can make something more difficult, it does not make it impossible. The ICC was given as an example, but it is not yet fully implemented and it still remains unclear what power it will have without US support. While discussing such issues is important, remaining optimistic was considered to be more productive.
The framework of communications rights
NGOs are using the communications rights framework to place these issues in the context of human rights by shifting the discussion at WSIS away from identifying technology as the problem, but rather to an understanding that technology issues such as the digital divide are merely symptoms of some of the bigger issues around globalization, economics, and the persistence of poverty. It concerns the larger problem of where money is going to and falling away from with a recognition that technology issues reflect and reinforce these tendencies. Thus WSIS will have real implications for those interested in social development issues.
There is a cultural ignorance surrounding technology and science which is often discussed as an inert conduit or machine considered part of a higher order unassociated with good or bad. However, in the areas of development and globalization, science and technology are understood to be far from neutral. There are important issues concerning the way technology is designed, controlled and distributed. Even the term "digital divide" places it within an economic framework.
A major concern is the focus of discussion on the privatization of information and information technologies that is occurring with other major global development and resource issues. The privatization of water is one example, but technology was considered especially problematic because it does have to be provided by industry and private corporations. What has been assumed in much of the discussion of these issues is that the privatizing or owning the spectrum or content is inevitable thereby relegating the role of the public to that of merely consumers who are part of the market.
The communications rights framework stresses that the market-economy model is not the only model that can shape this structure. There are other models for the common usage of various kinds of information technologies that are more egalitarian, such as the open source movement.
To discuss the information society as though it is a product and therefore something that can be bought, sold and controlled through private means, thus creating a market for industry, neglects the fact that telecommunications issues, as well as other development issues, must meet the needs of civil society.
The real discussion should be about the information moving through the technology, and not the information itself. To speak in terms of information puts the issue in the framework of globalization and private capital. By recognizing that communications is a right is to understand that it is more than just information flowing in one direction, but rather a two-way interaction between people.
Two organizations that have been discussing communications rights in this context are the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) and the Communications Rights in the Information Society (CRIS). In 1997, AMARC produced the Declaration of Milan which provided a framework for communications rights that is widely available and very familiar in the larger global society.
The CRIS campaign is echoing this language and clearly positing the issue of the information society as a human rights issue by trying to establish a framework and get groups involved so that people understand that information alone is not communications. Interest in organizing around this issue seems to be increasing, although the positions are not as well known in the US, and such groups are participating in the PrepComs civil society forums that are available to them. They are also organizing a Communications Rights Summit that will be held as an alternative WSIS for NGOs, civil society groups, and activists and engaging in education activities to try and strengthen the information available and make it more visible.
Another group that has been very involved in these issues is the Association for Progressive Communications (APC). They are the primary social justice organization that works on IT issues and they have been playing a big role in this. A visit to the Web sites of any of these organizations can provide a wealth of information for those who are interested.
The goal is to ensure that through people's participation and involvement in the decision-making, WSIS is based on the values of social justice and that issue of communications reflect plurality and sustain diversity, including that of culture and language. It should also reflect regional and local perspectives and experiences and recognize the participation of women. In particular, women's participation and that of indigenous populations should be encouraged because they are usually not at the table when technology is being discussed.
There are two other issues that will be on the table at WSIS that are important areas for NGO participation. The first is being taken up by the US government very seriously and involves information surveillance, censorship, privacy and security issues. In essence, the US will be bringing their war on terrorism to WSIS and NGOs should be particularly concerned about this.
Surveillance and privacy issues really have to do with the militarization of the information society. This militarization is being led by the Bush administration and it is happening in many other spheres of the social construct. They are interested not only in the surveillance of people's communications in the US, but all over the world and the Internet makes this possible for them.
Civil society groups are often told that they should not push too hard for issues such as privacy because it will keep technology from people who cannot afford it. For people who cannot afford Internet service, the only thing they have of value to companies is their personal information. If you insist that there is privacy, then these companies cannot mine from them. If they cannot mine this information, then they have no incentive to provide them with free service. Companies are using the language of WSIS in their arguments by framing the relaxation of privacy protections as a way to get technology to the people.
The role of governments, private industry and NGOs
The role of governments, private industry and civil society in the WSIS process was discussed and of particular concern was the influence and status of private industry in relation to civil society.
While governments are ultimately the key decision-makers in this process because they will be voting on the language in the WSIS documents, the private sector has also been given an official legal status at the Summit.
Some believe that this is largely because this issue is being explained in a technological fashion, as part of the digital divide. This is a fairly new development that has enormous implications on long-term interests regarding the UN, as well as globalization and its resulting economic and social development issues. It is no longer just governments and NGOs at the table. While one can argue whether this inclusion is desirable, private industry is undeniably a key player in the process.
The exact way in which private industry will be represented in WSIS was unclear. It was understood that credentials would be given to trade organizations of industry groups, and not to individual corporations. Thus, the Union of Telecom Providers would receive a credential rather than Microsoft. Such organizations of industry groups in many respects have the superficial appearance of being NGOs although they will clearly be representing corporate interests.
It seemed that industry groups would have an upper hand in the WSIS process compared to civil society because of their money, political influence, and their ability to aggressively lobby for their interests. During the last PrepCom, there was talk that governments were allowing industry groups to participate in the discussions and not NGOs. Governments will rely on the private sector in many ways to implement the objectives of WSIS, and the private sector will try and ensure that they are not encumbered by government regulations and policies in doing so.
It is unique situation for such a conference to endow the private sector with a legal status and while civil society groups can challenge this, they also have to work with it. However, all this does not mean that civil society groups are also not key players in this process and that their input will be insubstantial. It is important to recognize that civil society brings many different perspectives to the discussion and that can play many different roles in the process. There has been a lot of formal NGO participation in the PrepCom process and many of the issues that have been brought up during this discussion would not be put on the agenda of WSIS unless civil society was at the table influencing the language of the texts. They will also play a role down the road in holding the different stakeholders accountable, although we should be careful to not minimize the role of civil society as merely that of an accountability mechanism.
The WSIS bureaucracy is also trying to counter private sector influence by also elevating the status of civil society through the creation of a special bureau. Although the structure is complex and not very clear, there is recognition of NGO participation in a formal way. In effect, they cannot let the industry groups sit at the table without also providing civil society with some support.
Also, the private sector or business community does not necessarily have a unified front on many of these issues. In fact, there is quite a bit of dissension with smaller corporations fearing that they may be shut out of the process by the larger corporations.
Civil society can take advantage of this dissension and create strategic alliances with parts of the business community. This is done quite often in the US in terms of media policy where small telephone companies often are on the same side as civil society. One issue around collaboration can be forged is a possible US State Department initiative to have all ISP's install filter boxes that will allow the government to view Internet traffic. Such a regulation would be of concern to technology companies and civil societies can find a way to link their issues to this concern.
It is also important to recognize the role of other international bodies such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) or the World Intellectual Property Organization in this process. For example, there are cultural quotas whereby 25 percent of television programming has to be produced using local languages and local producers. The WTO is the body that the US and Hollywood will use to fight such a quota.
WSIS is not just about WSIS. In fact, the WSIS process may be helpful for groups working on these issues at a domestic level to begin to think about them in an international framework and to use WSIS to support their ongoing domestic activities. WSIS documents can be used strategically by domestic groups to hold governments and corporations accountable.
While some of the smaller countries have taken a stronger interest in WSIS, many governments and corporations have not. For many countries that do not have a lot of clout on a global scale and are therefore vulnerable to economic and political pressures, protecting some type of communications sovereignty is important. Such governments are trying to balance genuine globalization pressures while maintaining local control over local policies that deal with pieces of a global network. They are concerned with how such a global network can be used to improve the lives of their own citizens through local development.
If groups such as the Caribbean Broadcasting Union who are meeting to discuss these issues can make sure that their governments attend WSIS and take up these positions, then the conference can be very helpful indeed.
Increasing civil society involvement in WSIS
Civil society will have an impact on the language of the WSIS texts if they can successfully organize and use their influence. These communications rights issues are echoed to some degree in the principles of WSIS and this is in large part because NGOs have been at the table.
While attendance at WSIS and the Preparatory Committees is the most direct way for NGOs to be involved, obtaining accreditation and funding to attend is difficult. In some cases, often with smaller countries, NGOs are invited to be part of the government delegation. However, government and NGO participation is usually quite separate. The US delegation to WSIS is organized by the State Department and it is unlikely that NGOs will be invited to participate as part of the delegation.
It seemed strange that there has not been any discussion of using different mediums for participation and input into the process especially given the topic of WSIS. It seems to be following a very traditional and archaic participation structure that requires attendance at the meetings in order to have any influence. There is a large constituency of people organizations that are currently not involved in the process and it seems important that new methods for their participation are utilized. Attending WSIS should not be the only way for organizations to be involved
Others pointed out that NGOs can make a substantial difference down the line that is exclusive of attending the summit. The CRIS campaign Web site provides information on how to organize and participate at the local level and CRIS has also produced a number of documents that NGOs can sign onto.
Those international organizations that are heavily involved in the WSIS process, such as APC and AMARC, are unable to monitor every government and corporation in the world. Local NGOs can assist these international groups by providing them with important local information concerning corporate and government actions within their countries.
Domestic pressure campaigns against corporations and government agencies that are involved in WSIS is another way that NGOs can get involved if not directly in the process, but in the issues.
One of the biggest hurdles in organizing around these issues is that people don't think that it relates to them or their work. The issue is complicated and mystifying and there is a lack of understanding that serious economic and political issues are part of this discussion. The issue of media policy and communications has an impact on our total socialization and the values that we are learning and WSIS is just one expression of how this communications environment is coming under international control.
In the US, there has been very little coverage of WSIS. This is not surprising given the fact that most US media policy at the national, local and city level is not discussed. When local cable franchises are up for renewal, there is no discussion or press coverage. Right now, the FCC is in middle of a ruling on media consolidation there has been almost no coverage despite the fact that groups all around the country have been talking to the FCC about the dangers of media consolidation.
There seems to be a disconnect between NGOs and activists working on WSIS issues and IT networks at the local level. Although some within the local networks are aware that to some extent their life circumstances are being determined by this process, they are not identifying the same issues or speaking the same language. They are not relating to the content of the issues that traditional NGOs are presenting in relation to WSIS.
People need to understand that they have a stake in these issues and that it will have an impact in them no matter what specific issue they are working on or how they are trying to strengthen civil society. The way this impacts on every issue needs to be drawn out and clarified by translating the information on communications rights into language that fits into the agendas of a wider range of NGOs. More basic education on the relation of these issues to human rights and development is needed. Couching the issues as part of the larger push for a private globalized economy is one way this could be done.
While organizations such as WFM are disseminating good information on WSIS, the reporting process still needs to be improved and more NGOs that are actively involved need to do a better job of informing and educating the public.
Summary points
*The outcome of WSIS will be a Declaration of Principles, which is a statement of political will, and a Plan of Action to address the gaps in the global information and communications network. The major stakeholders are governments, the private sector and civil society.
*WSIS issues are complex and deal with serious economic and political issues, such as the privatization of information and information technologies, that impact on all NGOs regardless of their focus.
*Civil society brings many different perspectives and can play many different roles at WSIS to ensure that it is based on values of social justice and diversity.
*The impact of civil society on the language of the Declaration of Principles and the Plan of Action depends on their ability to organize and use their influence.
*By using a communications rights framework, NGOs are addressed the bigger issues of globalization, economics and the persistence of poverty.
*The influence of private industry in relation to civil society is one concern of NGOs participating in WSIS.
*The market-economy model should not be seen as the only model that can shape the structure of an information society. More egalitarian options should be considered.
*Participation and input by NGOs and individuals into the WSIS process needs to be increased beyond attendance and should utilize the technologies currently available.
*Local NGOs can assist those organizing on the international level by providing them with country specific information.
More Information on NGOs
More Information on NGOs and the UN
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
