[Lac] Re: [hipatia] GobInt: posicion Brasilera.

[Marcelo D'Elia Branco]

Amig at s,

Recebi agora do Ministério das Relações Exteriores do Brasil o  texto da
intervenção brasileira feita em Genebra na reunião
constitutiva do WGIG. * (copiei ele bem abaixo...é longo)
Acho que isto ajuda a esclarecer a posição de nosso governo. Não
queremos que os governos controlem a Internet nem que a UIT seja órgão
centralizador.

Marcelo Branco

--------------------------------------------------


Cristiano Franco
Berbert
<cberbert at mre.gov.br>
           Para: 
'Marcelo D'Elia
Branco'
<marcelo at debian-rs.org>
        Assunto: 
RES: Governança da
Internet
           Data: 
Tue, 5 Oct 2004
12:19:44 -0300 

Marcelo,

Encaminho texto da intervenção brasileira feita em Genebra na reunião
constitutiva do WGIG, o que ajuda a explicar a posição brasileira, e
desfazer eventuais equívocos. Sua explicação ao Diego está corretíssima.
Abraços. 

Cristiano

Em Sáb, 2004-10-02 às 15:52, Diego Saravia escreveu:
> Paso un Mensaje de Marcelo Branco sobre el origen de la posicion Brasilera
> sobre el Gobierno de Internet.
> 
> En forma personal le hice una consulta sobre ciertas ideas que habia leido y
> esta es la respuesta que considero interesante, mas alla de las ideas que
> originaron la consulta:
> 
> ---------------------------------
A posição brasileira segue uma linha geral da politica externa
brasileiria de exigir multilateralidade nos organismos
internacionais...contra todas as posições unilaterlista (impostas por um
só país) - no caso combater que a ICANN seja subordinado ao Departamento
de Comércio dos USA...
> Mas além disso, a posição do governo Brasileiro é pela ampliação da
> participação da sociedade civil na gestão da Internet. Como já
> praticamos no Brasil. Acho que a internet-Brasil tem a gestão mais
> democrática das que conheço no mundo. O governo estimulou a ampliação da
> participação da Sociedade Civil...eleições diretas...elegemos Mario
> Teza. 
> O governo do Brasil NÃO quer que os governos controlem a internet como
> algumas interpretações sugeriram. O governo quer apenas que nas
> instâncias governamentais que discutem o futuro da gestão da internet os
> USA não fique só e imperial.
> O governo do Brasil exige a sua participação e dos demais países do
> planeta em igualdade de condições com o governo dos USA.
> 
> Abraços
> 
> Marcelo Branco
> -------------------------------------------

* Posição do Governo Brasileiro:


"Mr. Chairman,

I  would  like  to thank you for this opportunity to present Brazil's 
position on the establishment of the Working Group on Internet
Governance.

This  meeting  offers  a  valuable  opportunity to convey to the 
Secretary-General  of  the United Nations our ideas and suggestions  on 
the  setup of the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG).

Brazil  took  part  in  the  WSIS  debates  on  Internet Governance  in
a constructive and forward-looking spirit. We joined the Geneva
Consensus on the establishment of the WGIG
and we are committed to contributing to its work in the same spirit.

Mr. Chairman,

During  WSIS  I,  Brazil  was  among  those  countries  that stressed 
the  need  for multilateral,  transparent  and democratic  governance 
of the Internet. A broader debate on the  issue  was  perceived  as  a
key component of the WSIS.

By  democratic  we  mean  the  fullest practicable participation of all
stakeholders, particularly governments, in  the  present system of
Internet governance. We recognize recent efforts to allow representation
of governments in some organizations,  such  as GAC within ICANN.
Nevertheless, the level of governmental representation in Internet
governance remains  thoroughly  insufficient. It is difficult to accept
that governments should be limited to a mere advisory role in
regard  to  decisions with clear public policy implications.

Unfortunately,  ICANN has so far been unable to overcome the fact  that 
it was constituted without prior consultation to other governments.

During  WSIS  I,  Brazil  pointed out that the international community
still lacks a forum for the discussion of the many international
public-policy issues related to the Internet in which  governments  are 
allowed  a  level  of participation commensurate  with  their
responsibilities.

Internet  Governance  is  much more than just the management of  domain 
names  and  IP addresses. Data protection, spam, cyber-security, 
multilingual and local content are Internet governance  issues.
Interconnection costs, the protection of IPR  and  the  digital  divide 
are also Internet governance issues. In most of these areas, the main
responsibility lies with governments; yet,  they  lack the means to
coordinate effectively  and  promptly  at  the international  level.

Brazil  therefore  proposed  the  creation  of an intergovernmental 
forum,  a meeting place where governments could  discuss
Internet-related issues. The objective is not to  substitute  or 
duplicate  any  existing organization or entity, but rather to fill a
gap by providing countries with the  opportunity to express their
opinions and to coordinate with each other.

In  addition  to  providing  a  much-needed instance  for governmental 
coordination, such  a  forum would also prove invaluable  to  many
developing countries which, at present, are  unable  to  follow  the
discussions that take place in countless different  for  that  deal 
with Internet issues.

By  multilateral,  we  mean  a  forum  that allows  for the
representation  of  sovereign  states  on  an equal footing.

Multilateralism  is  a  condition for legitimacy. Legitimacy implies 
independence  and  equal  participation  of  all countries,  which  is
clearly  not  the  case  of  ICANN.

Finally,  transparency  implies  an accountable  decision-making process
open to the participation of all stakeholders and  subject  to  the 
control  of  society  at  large.

Brazil  continues  to  abide  by  these principles.  Our challenge  now 
is  to  ensure that the WGIG will ensure the balanced participation of
all stakeholders whilst respecting the  overarching  need  for 
democracy,  transparency  and multilateral decision-making.

The  Geneva  Consensus  is  clear.  All stakeholders  - governments, 
the  civil society, the private sector and the scientific community -
should be part of the Working Group on Internet Governance. We still
need, however, to agree on the format  of participation  of  different
stakeholders in the process.

In  Brazil's  opinion,  Internet  Governance  is first  and foremost a
political issue. The WGIG is a political group, to be established under
the United Nations and within the World Summit  on  the  Information 
Society process.

We  acknowledge,  however,  that  there  are some who hold a different 
view. As Ambassador Kummer noted in Hammamet, two different schools of
thought emerged during WSIS debates. One school  of thought 
sympathetic  to  the  present system of Internet  Governance  and  to 
the  "status quo"; the other favorable  to  an evolution of the present
system, towards a multilateral,  democratic  and transparent governance
of the Internet.

Brazil  believes  that  the  first  step  towards the establishment  of 
a legitimate WGIG would be to incorporate representatives from those two
different schools of thought.

We should therefore strive for a "political balance" between these  two 
competing  views  of  Internet  Governance.

In  addition  to  political  balance, there is also the need for 
geographical  balance. It is clear that the WGIG should have 
representatives  from  governments  and  civil society organizations 
from both developed and developing countries, as  stated  in  the 
Geneva  Declaration.

Balance  does  not  mean,  however,  that  all stakeholders should 
have  the  same number  of  representatives.  The participation  of 
each  sector  should be tailored to their roles,  mandates  and  needs. 
The  WSIS  remains  first and foremost an intergovernamental process. As
I indicated above, the largest deficit in Internet governance is in the
area of intergovernmental  coordination.  In  addition  to  that,
Governments are special stakeholders, since they are the only

ones who are also mandated to speak on behalf of the broader interests 
of  a  people  and a country - which includes the private sector, users
and NGOs.

This  is,  in  fact, what we have been doing in Brazil. As a
fully-democratic  country, participation  by  all is a much cherished 
national value and is an integrating value of our foreign  policy. 
This  is  how  we  view  and how we handle Internet governance in
Brazil. This is why Brazil created the Internet  National  Steering
Committee, which is composed of representatives  from  the  Government, 
civil  society, the private sector and academia.”