This set of proposal is very important to raise the issue “Internet Governance in the world”, especially in the Less Developed Countries, that the internet is for all in equal bases in transparency, and Accessibility to all multi-stakeholders in the world.The Internet's role in helping LDCs' development, the role in promoting human rights, public policy as well as peace and security cannot be overemphasized.
The Meeting which shall be held in Sao Paulo, must offers some of basic principles and roadmap to build good environment for Internet Governance for all stakeholder in the world taking in
Consideration the freedom for expression, opinion and equal of the accessibility for all stakeholder. IGF is official status. It is the only official forum within the U.N. system to deal with -- which is specifically tailored for suggestion about public policies about Internet governance.
It is the broadness or potential broadness of our topics because according to the Tunis Agenda, , IGF is mandated to discuss public policy issues on human rights as well as peace, security, cyber security and privacy protection.
The exercise of human rights on the Internet is an issue of increasing interest and
Importance as the rapid pace of technological advancement and the constant evolution of
Pervasive digital mediums give rise to novel legal rights, obligations and scenarios.
The Less Developed Countries must also be protected online, and should not be held to different standards. Therefore, the human right for all people in the internet must be protected and secure, so that everyone can feel secure and able to express about his opinion in easy way. It’s very important for the Democratically in the LDC’s to find the right way to forward so it need help, because it’s in the early stage of freedom and democracy.
The Citizens of Less Developed Countries should be able to send electronic communications to one another free from the fear of surveillance, monitoring, interception or any other violation of privacy. Where interference is unavoidable for the purpose of security, such interference must follow clearly defined processes as laid down by law as spams are always common.
We ask the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance to formally challenge the Tunis Agenda’s definition of stakeholder ‘roles’ by adopting the equal status’ principle stated above. We ask that the Meeting overtly recognize and defend the modifications of traditional policy making authority inherent in the multistakeholder model.
The advocates of this new principle recognize that there are numerous areas where the traditional role of the state is appropriate and necessary, such as legislation and law enforcement in territorial jurisdictions. Yet because so much of the policies and services of the Internet are transnational, we believe that Internet governance must change their traditional roles and give all stakeholders the same status in the formulation of policy and encourage government participation from Less Developed Countries.
If we can be producing tangible results I mean the outcome of the discussions which IGF can develop in forms of non-binding opinions or recommendations or policy principles on all these topics as mentioned above. I believe the outcomes of IGF would be very useful to different sectors. That would also raise the attractiveness of IGF.