Dear Walubengo, I have always wanted to ask: who decides what is good for discussion in this forum? I am asking this because I know the Kenya Communications Bill went through the first reading and if my memory serves me right the PS promised to have the stakeholders meet with the Parliamentary Committee on Communications. Is this not a priority. Just recently a listed member did not even know that we have an ICT Policy. In my view we should concentrate more on policies that we have the poer to change. Internet Governance has been a thorny issue in ITU. There is nothing we can do as third worlders to change the situation. Let us simply take advantage of the technology. Victor Maloi On 11/08/2008, John Walubengo <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote:
Greetings all,
Today we just want to get upto speed with the genesis and rationale for Internet Governance. Internet Governance issues arose from the increasing use of the Internet during the mid and late 1990s. Most countries were surprised at the increasing role the internet was having on their Socio-economic as well as Political landscape. They then realised that lacked the oversight power the US government unilatery enjoyed over the development and use of the Internet resources.
Indeed one of the Key questions then as it is now, was why should one Government influence the direction of a global resource without reference to other governments? The way the Internet was governed was definitely not commensurate with its global reach or nature. A lot of lobbying and pressure particularly from Latin America, Asia Pacific and ITU started agitating for a change in the oversight role the US government had and continues to have over the Internet. The anti-change proponents however maintained that the current governance structure through the US Dept of Commerce and ICANN is what has given the Internet this phenomenal growth – hence the famous cliché – "If it ain't broken, why try to fix it?"
The World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) process was commissioned by UN in the late 1990s to look into this and other emerging issues of the Internet such as the legal, economic and social-cultural dimensions of the Internet. The WSIS process concluded in Tunis, 2005, give no definite rulings on these issues but recommended instead the creation of a multi-stakeholder forum, the IGF – the Internet Governance Forum which continues to study and deliberate on these issues to date. WSIS also supplied the working definition for Internet Governance as:- the development and application by Stakeholders of the rules, norms, procedures and practices that influence the evolution and use of the Internet.
The Stakeholders (States, Civil Society, Academia, Media, Businesses, etc) are all actively involved in the Internet Governance Forum with the sole objective of ensuring that their interests are catered for as the Internet continues to evolve. The IGF has so far held two summits, Greece, and Brazil with a 3rd due at the end of this year in India. The stakeholders propose positions on the emerging and contentious issues that are used to somewhat inform the direction the Internet takes. However, most of Africa continues to sleep as Nations and other stakeholders scramble to claim a stake and positions on what is becoming the most important battle of the 21st Century – the battle for the Information Superhighway.
Those with experiences, comments, clarifications, observations or objections have 1day to say something on today's Introductory theme.
walu.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
This message was sent to: victormaloi3@gmail.com Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/victormaloi3%40gmail.co...