[WSIS CS-Plenary] Report on Plenary 11 November, afternoon and evening sessions

[Dorte Munch]

Reports on 11 November, afternoon and evening sessions

Report by Jane Johnsen and Dorte Munch

As was the case yesterday a lot of time was wasted on editorial modifications 
as well as on discussing again issues, which have already been agreed upon

The afternoon session has examined paragraphs 41-43, and 48 – 54. The evening 
session examined paragraphs 53-61.

Paragraphs to be discussed again after more consultations and new proposals 
are: 41, 42, 43, 49, 50, 52, 55, 56, 57-58, and 61.

Adopted paragraphs are: 51, 53, 54, 59, and 60.

Regarding the paragraphs still to be discussed, the main issues are:

Paragraph 41-43: modification of language and references to international 
conventions- in this case ITU and ILO. Vietnam, Cuba and El Salvador to look 
at it.

Paragraph 48 – 49: reopening of an already agreed text- disagreement over 
bracketed text in title. Several suggestions. Latin America, Africa and 
others wanted to keep “identity” in title, while the EU, Russia and USA 
wanted to delete it because they found it redundant when identity was 
mentioned in the text and by association with diversity. EU and USA also 
recalled the support for the reference to the UNESCO declaration because of 
objections to specific references to other declarations.

Paragraph 50: Mexico noted that reference to the recognition of the rights of 
authors and artists belongs in the section concerning IPR.

Paragraph 52: Key debate on whether or not to keep a media paragraph. Chair 
found that it was essential and that it can be based on existing language in 
UN documents.  There was agreement that the paragraph should be should and 
precise. El Salvador commended that if paragraphs 4 and 5 were resolved this 
paragraph would be redundant. South Africa stated, with some support, that 
both rights and responsibilities and their role as stakeholders should be 
addressed.

Paragraph 55: Syria suggested deletion of the paragraph with support from 
Russia, partly Saudi Arabia. A long list of states including USA and EU 
strongly recommended to maintain the full text. Saudi Arabia suggested a 
compromise with the addition of the sentence “in compliance with 
international conventions”. The Chair stated strongly in favor of retaining 
the text as it was.

Paragraph 56: South Africa supported by China and Syria wanted to delete the 
word “criminal”, whereas the USA supported by Canada opposed a deletion on 
the grounds that it diluted the legal implications of the paragraph. 

Paragraph 59: Discussion centered on wording of the title of the section: The 
subject was “knowledge in Information Society” or “knowledge for Information 
Society”.

Paragraph 60: It was decided to replace “monitor” with “follow-up”. Russia 
wanted to insert “UN” in front of “Development Goals”.

The session ended with presentation and the beginning of the discussion of 
the proposal made by a working group for a replacement of the paragraphs 57-
58. The wording of the draft is:
Draft section B11 ‘International and regional Cooperation” in the Declaration
“A.	We aim at making full use of the opportunities offered by ICTs in our 
efforts to reach the internationally agreed development goals, and to realize 
the key principles set forth in this Declaration. The Information Society is 
intrinsically global in nature and national efforts need to be supported by 
effective international and regional co/operation among governments, the 
private sector, civil society and other stakeholders including the 
international financial institutions.
B.	In order to build an inclusive global Information Society, we will 
rely on effectively implementing and seeking concrete international 
approaches [and mechanisms] including financial and technical assistance. We 
therefore invite all stakeholders to commit to the [“Digital Solidarity 
Agenda”] [set forth in the Plan of Action] to assist in narrowing the digital 
divide, [promoting] access to ICTs, creating digital opportunities, and 
harnessing the potential of ICTs for development.
Bbis.	Regional integration efforts contribute to the development of the 
global Information Society and make strong cooperation within and among 
regions indispensable. The regional dialogue should contribute to national 
capacity/building and to the alignment of national strategies with the goals 
of this Declaration of Principles in a compatible way, while respecting 
national and regional particularities. [In this context, we welcome the New 
Partnership for Africa’s development (NEPAD), and encourage the international 
community to support the ICT/related measures of such initiatives as well as 
those belonging to similar efforts in other regions, such as Red de 
Connectividad de Las Americas, Plan Pueblo Panamá and Plan de Quito.]
C.	We resolve to assist developing countries and countries with 
economies in transition through the provision of financial and technical 
assistance and by creating an environment conducive to technology transfer 
[on mutually agreed terms], consistent with the Key Principles set forth in 
this Declaration.”
The discussion following the presentation involved indeed many speakers. The 
most important element was a Digital Solidarity Fund, which the developing 
countries wanted to be included and the developed countries did not want. As 
noted, a compromise suggestion – originally submitted by the EU – regarding 
a “Digital Solidarity Agenda” was also the subject of much debate. It seems 
that the issues of financing opinions are so far quite entrenched.