Abstract:
Controlling the Internet has for a long time been the privilege of academics in the
USA. However, with the evolution of the Internet as the world communication
medium of the 21st century and the world-wide-web providing the infrastructure for
business and public services in the digital era, the stakes have risen dramatically.
The value of the Internet is nowadays considered extremely important in a number
of key areas of public life ranging from business, law, local and central government
to international politics. Various proposals as to who should be responsible for
controlling or even policing the Internet have been considered and debated upon
over the past few years. The issue has been raised at an unprecedented level with
governments of the most powerful countries on the planet locked in serious and
longstanding diplomatic negotiations as to which of the super powers should be in
control. Yet the less powerful and smaller nations have repeatedly called for the
establishment of an international organization to guarantee independent control of
the Internet. This paper considers the above two proposals and attempts to answer
the following questions: a) Do single countries deserve the right of having absolute
control and acting as the sole guardian of the ultimate communication medium? b)
Would an international organization be the answer? If so, how independent can it be
and how much security can it offer to the smaller nations and the individual user?
The study of each case is performed on the basis of what criteria would apply in
terms of legal framework adopted, transparency of procedures and degree of
acceptance of the controlling body on a world wide basis. The ultimate question
raised is: can the guardian be trusted and if so how widespread this trust would be?
The results of the first internet governance forum meeting in Athens in 2006 and the
aims of the second due in Rio de Janeiro in November 2007 are also discussed
Machine summary:
In November 2005 the international congress for information society that met in Tunis issued a declaration requesting the UN Secretary General to establish an international organization that would be responsible for the control of the Internet (Civil Society, 2005).
Non-traditional bodies (such as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [ICANN], the World Wide Web Consortium, or TRUSTe) that engage in Internet regulation and oversight have arisen in recent years, but their decision making processes are too often both inaccessible and unaccountable to those most affected.
International bodies and governments are concerned but at the same time need to work together to ensure progress is uninterrupted and e-democracy continues to evolve on the basis of equal access to information and transparency to access and control.
During the WSIS in Tunis in 2005, the secretary general of the United Nations has announced the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as a framework for studying, proposing and potentially establishing the system(s) that would allow for a unilaterally acceptable means of controlling the Internet.
In order to ensure that the process works as efficiently as expected by the WSIS, it has been proposed that the IG Forum should establish a distributed secretariat aiming at: • Encourage self-organized, primarily virtual multi-stakeholder discussion groups to identify and explore possible topics for consideration by the main Forum.
The first igf meeting - Athens, Greece 2006 and beyond To add to the above concerns the author adds his own arguments and queries: Could we eventually trust a Non-Government organization to control the Internet; and if so, how independent can that be?