Closing plenary: multistakeholderism for the governance of the digital world

NetMundial Plus 10: Charting the Future of Internet Governance and Digital Policy

The NetMundial Plus 10 event, held in São Paulo, Brazil, on 30 April 2024, was a pivotal assembly of global stakeholders, including government officials, the private sector, civil society, the technical community, and academia. The objective of the gathering was to assess the progress of internet governance and digital policy processes since the landmark 2014 NetMundial meeting and to establish a forward-looking framework for continued improvement.

**Key Points and Arguments:**

1. **Digital Transformation (2014-2024):** The decade’s digital advancements, particularly in artificial intelligence, were acknowledged for their potential to drive human, social, and economic progress. However, there was a shared concern about the risks of these technologies, such as increasing power imbalances and environmental impacts, if not governed in line with international and human rights law.

2. **Multi-Stakeholder Engagement in Internet Governance:** The event reinforced the necessity of engaging a broad spectrum of stakeholders in internet governance. Reflecting on foundational discussions like the Tunis Agenda, there was a call for enhanced mechanisms to ensure that the voices of all communities effectively influence decision-making processes.

3. **NetMundial Principles and São Paulo Multistakeholder Guidelines:** The principles from the 2014 NetMundial were reaffirmed, with the introduction of the São Paulo Multistakeholder Guidelines. These guidelines are intended to be dynamic, evolving with practical application and experience, and serve as a standard for evaluating multi-stakeholder processes.

4. **Addressing Power Asymmetries:** A consensus emerged on the need to address disparities in power among stakeholders. It was proposed that multi-stakeholder processes should equip participants with the necessary resources and capabilities for meaningful and sustained engagement.

5. **Coordination of Governance Spaces:** The discussions highlighted the need for improved coordination between various governance initiatives to prevent fragmentation. The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) was identified as a key platform for enhancing coordination and sharing information.

6. **Enhancing Participation in Multilateral Processes:** The meeting advocated for more inclusive multilateral processes, particularly stressing the empowerment of stakeholders from the Global South. Emphasis was placed on capacity building as a crucial factor for enabling effective participation.

**Evidence and Observations:**

– The event was marked by a spirit of cooperation, with participants actively contributing to the discussions and shaping the final multi-stakeholder statement. – Direct quotes from speakers in the transcript provided insights into the interactive and diverse nature of the event. – The outcomes of the meeting were the product of a comprehensive, bottom-up process, incorporating a wide array of perspectives.

**Conclusion:**

The NetMundial Plus 10 event culminated in a multi-stakeholder statement that articulated a collective vision for a strengthened, inclusive, and transparent internet governance and digital policy framework. The statement called for widespread promotion of the event’s outcomes across various processes and emphasised the need for all stakeholders to implement the NetMundial principles and guidelines to secure a digital future that upholds human rights and promotes sustainable development.

**Noteworthy Insights:**

– The event underscored a strong commitment to the multi-stakeholder model, recognising that the complexity of internet governance requires collaborative efforts from all groups. – The discussions acknowledged the need for governance structures to be flexible and responsive to the rapid evolution of digital technologies and geopolitical shifts. – The focus on power asymmetries indicated a move towards a more equitable approach to internet governance, ensuring that all voices, particularly those that are underrepresented, are considered.

In summary, the NetMundial Plus 10 event represented a significant step in the ongoing conversation on internet governance and digital policy, offering a comprehensive set of principles and guidelines to navigate the digital era’s challenges and opportunities.

Renata Mielli:
to like our high-level executive committee worked on each document session seeking as presented by Bertrand yesterday on the first day on the session that presents the previously the preliminary documents to include suggestions while maintaining the general structure of the document which was positively received by all stakeholders by all sectors presents participants here in our net mundial plus 10. Based on the contributions in debate held HLEC worked I am sorry In order to achieve this mission, we named two pen holders per section of the text. These pen holders were also involved in each respective in-work session as reporteer and moderators. Based on the comments and suggestions during the sections, these pen holders made the first new version of the document that was discussed by the HLAC yesterday at night, very night, and for all the day. In this sense, we will now present the final version of this NetModal Plus 10 document. We are going to read paragraph for paragraph of the document in a sense that everybody can saw the work we’ve done till now. To start the reading, I will ask Manal, that’s with us remotely, Manal is also a member of our HLAC, to start the reading. Please Manal, the floor is yours. Thank you very much.

Manal Ismail:
Just waiting for Manal. Yes, can you hear me now? Sorry, I was not able to unmute. I hope you can hear me now. Yes, we are hearing you. Okay. So, this is the NetMondial Plus 10 multi-stakeholder statement, strengthening internet governance and digital policy processes. written in Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 30th, 2024. The preamble, this is the non-binding outcome of a bottom-up open and participatory process involving people from governments, private sector, civil society, technical community, and academia from around the world. It aspires to strengthen internet governance and digital policy processes. One, challenges to internet governance and digital policy processes from 2024, from 2014 to 2024, setting the scene for the Sao Paulo guidelines. Convened in Sao Paulo, Brazil in April, 2024, stakeholders from academia, civil society, governments, and international organizations, private sector, and technical community around the world asserted the need for improvements to internet governance and digital policy processes. The event spelled out how to bring all stakeholders, people, cultures, countries, and distinct economists together to solve the common challenges we face. These transcend our divisions and can only be resolved by harnessing the energy of our disagreements, arguments, and hopes to shape a better future for all. The rapid digital transformation, continuous innovation, and spread of multiple internet-based technologies and applications, including the role of new digital and disruptive technologies, such as artificial intelligence, present us with opportunities and challenges impacting economic, political, and civic spheres. These need to be addressed in the governance of the internet and digital policy processes. The technologies open up great opportunities for accelerating human, social and economic development and tackling inequalities, building more inclusive societies. At the same time, if not properly managed in accordance with international law and international human rights law, they could also bring uncertainties, insecurities and power asymmetries among and within countries, economies and stakeholders, deepening divides, affecting the civic space and resulting in environmental impacts. No stakeholder can handle these challenges alone. Internet governance and digital policy processes, more than ever, require unprecedented coordination and cooperation among stakeholders to effectively unlock the benefit of this massive transformation for everyone, everywhere, and to collaboratively prevent and remediate abuses online. As highlighted in landmark discussions such as the Tunis Agenda in 2014, NetMondial, Internet Governance Process Principles. Internet governance and digital policy processes should fully involve academia, civil society, government and international organizations, private sector, technical community and end users. The named parties are also acknowledged as stakeholders for the purpose of previous and ongoing discussions. To strengthen multi-stakeholder spaces for participation, it is necessary to improve mechanisms for building consensus and producing guidelines and recommendations in such a way that communities’ voices have an impact. on multilateral and other decision-making processes so that effective solutions to the challenges we face can be found and implemented. Would you like me to continue or someone else would like to leave? The 2014 NetMondial meeting was groundbreaking.

Renata Mielli:
Thank you very much. We will continue from here.

Valeria Betancourt:
The 2014 NetMondial meeting was groundbreaking, marking a significant milestone in the evolution of Internet governance. As we approach the 20th anniversary of the World Summit on the Information Society and the Tunis agenda, and a decade after NetMondial, it is high time to address the lingering unresolved issue, how to help all actors to contribute to a multi-stakeholder process to create the network global governance architecture that is people-centered, sustainable, and development-oriented as the network society demands. In this context, NetMondial Plus10 had to focus on bolstering Internet governance architecture, bringing together relevant stakeholders to deliver concrete, non-binding recommendations on how to strengthen the multi-stakeholder approach as the basis for consensus building and democratic governance, including in existing multilateral and other relevant decision forums. NetMondial Plus10 reaffirms the 2014 NetMondial principles to guide Internet governance and digital policy processes, proposes procedures to implement them effectively, and delivers messages to shape intergovernmental, national, and regional dialogues and decisions on the future of digital governance. NetMundial Plus10 reaffirms the need to build an effective and functioning multi-stakeholder governance-as-architecture that facilitates an informed participatory and transparent engagement between sectors in a multi-stakeholder model. This is the best way to contribute to the construction of a digital future that respects human rights and fundamental freedoms and fosters progress towards the attainment of sustainable development goals and the development of inclusive societies that promote peace, prosperity and environmental sustainability for all. To help address these challenges, NetMundial Plus10 reaffirms the NetMundial 2014 Statement which states that the Internet is a global resource which should be managed in the public interest in accordance with international law and international human rights law. Recognizes the relevance of transparency and accountability for improved Internet governance and digital policy processes. Reasserts the continued relevance of the ten principles for Internet governance processes adopted in 2014 recommending their applicability to address existing and emerging digital policy challenges. Offers operational guidelines to help the implementation of these principles in a diversity of situations. Provides input into various ongoing processes regarding the evolution of the governance architecture for digital policy. And recommends that the principles and guidelines set out in this document be implemented by all stakeholders at all levels.

Timea Suto:
This document represents the outcome of a collaborative, open and inclusive process shaped by 154 written online contributions from representatives of governments, the private sector, civil society and the technical and academic communities gathered through an open consultation held between March and April 2024. The consultation was structured around three major topics, principles for digital governance processes, guidelines for implementation of multistakeholder mechanisms, and contributions to ongoing governance processes. Based on the undertaken consultations, valuable inputs were also gathered from more than 800 participants attending both in person and online on the two days of the event. So in this section, principles for Internet governance and digital policy processes, 2.1, the NetMundial 2014 process principles have stood the test of time. The 2014 NetMundial meeting adopted a broad set of substantive principles to guide Internet governance. It also adopted a focus set of ten principles for Internet governance processes, the process principles, which are a key focus of this NetMundial Plus 10 meeting. These process principles are statements of how the Internet governance system should work across the broad scope of technologies and public policy matters related to the Internet. They continue to define how to maintain an open and interoperable Internet, which is a core responsibility and central value of Internet governance and digital policy processes. Even with the rapid technical, social, and economic transformations that have taken place since then, these process principles remain relevant and valid in addressing today’s Internet governance and digital policy challenges and represent a distinct and important reference for all stakeholders in how the Internet governance and digital policy processes should be shaped. As they have not yet been fully implemented, there is a need for collaborative efforts toward their full application, opening more and better opportunities for all stakeholders to meaningfully participate, especially in multilateral digital policy mechanisms. The 2014 NetMundial process principles should be the basis of any future evolution in Internet governance and digital policy processes, and it is vital for all stakeholders to fully implement them as a shared vision of this community.

Luciano Mazza:
2.2, the multi-stakeholder process principle needs to be fully implemented by all stakeholders. The 2014 process principle regarding multi-stakeholders reads as, multi-stakeholder Internet governance should be built on democratic multi-stakeholder processes, ensuring the meaningful and accountable participation of all stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, civil society, the technical community, the academic community and users. The respective roles and responsibilities of stakeholders should be interpreted in a flexible manner with reference to the issue under discussion. Each stakeholder has different roles and responsibilities, depending on the issues and stages of specific processes. The distribution of roles and responsibilities between stakeholders is an ongoing and contentious subject of debate. There are persisting concerns that too many governance processes are failing to properly apply the multi-stakeholder process principle. This is especially due to the lack of inclusive and meaningful participation of all relevant stakeholders. Including all relevant stakeholders in the decision-making process on a genuinely and equal footing can indeed be a critical factor to avoid failure. Multi-stakeholder approaches to Internet governance and digital policy processes work best when they are inclusive and when stakeholders can identify their own interest in an issue and participate in processes to address it. They succeed when there is a mindset of openness to new ideas and a willingness by all stakeholders involved to understand each other’s points of views and make compromises to find a consensus. To gain the most positive benefits from Internet governance and digital policy processes, the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders must be interpreted flexibly and openly. Sectors, organizations and individuals must not be shut out of a given process due to an outdated categorization that was suggested in the past. That said, a vital component of protecting and improving such processes is to make sure they incorporate the relevant forms of expertise and experience that are required at different stages of discussing a particular issue. Capacity building is essential to improve stakeholders’ understanding and ability to participate on an equal footing. This also implies a realistic analysis of and response to the power symmetries between and within stakeholders in a discussion.

Jordan Carter:
Section 2.3, the coordination of governance spaces, is essential. Numerous initiatives and processes have emerged to address the broad diversity of issues raised by the digital transformation. Sometimes, multiple processes address the same issues in parallel. This has both positive and negative impacts. Distributed initiatives on a particular issue can help cover the diversity of approaches and perspectives. But at the same time, there is a risk that separate discussions on a specific issue may create incompatible and even conflicting outcomes. There are also difficulties posed for stakeholders to follow simultaneous and duplicative processes, especially for stakeholders from the Global South. It is important to avoid fragmentation and duplication of fora to make sure that Internet governance and digital policy processes can be effective. Instead, better coordination between processes dealing with overlapping issues is strongly needed. The Internet Governance Forum can deliver on this need by strengthening its coordination and information-sharing roles. It should also serve as a venue for follow-up of multilateral digital policy agreements – see Section 4 – given its broad mandate. The IGF’s open nature, hybrid approach, intersessional processes, connections with local, national and regional initiatives, and inclusive design make it suitable for these responsibilities. To deliver on expectations for coordination and information-sharing, new working methods may need to be developed, and new financial and human resources would be essential. These could be designed to deliver genuinely improved coordination and information-sharing, and also to generate improved outcome deliberation and insight. They could also drive stronger connections between governance processes and the implementation of outcomes that would strengthen the overall effectiveness of Internet governance and digital policy processes.

Min Jiang:
Developing such working methods should strive to avoid conflicts with or duplication of existing processes or creating new burdens, and ensure button-up participation on a genuinely equal footing, along with transparency and accountability in such processes. Effective improvements in coordination will benefit all stakeholders and the ability of Internet governance and digital policy processes to deal with the issues they are addressing. and improving multilateral processes, section 3.1. Improving participation in multilateral processes. Multilateral processes need to become more inclusive to ensure the meaningful participation of all stakeholders, especially from the global south. Incorporating diverse voices and multiple worldviews by involving broader stakeholder input can enhance multilateral processes. Better decisions can be achieved and better delivery of outcomes assured through inclusive processes for adequate deliberation and consensus building based on the guidelines and processes steps described below. To achieve these gains, all stakeholders should be empowered to contribute in a meaningful way to all stages of a process tackling issues of concern. The appointment of advisory expert roles and or platforms adequately resourced should be encouraged to effectively facilitate and analyze diverse contributions from the agenda setting phase. During deliberations and on draft resolutions and texts, following agreed guidelines and timeframes and incorporating ethical and public interest considerations. Similarly, significant investments in capacity building and education to strengthen each step of the process are vital to achieve effective contributions. It is important that each investment, such investments account for the relative power differences. between and within different stakeholders and stakeholder groups. In the spirit of the multi-stakeholder principles, multilateral processes should evolve. They must share the scope of their work and publish a commitment regarding transparency of the process, including but not limited to a timeline highlighting critical opportunities for participation. As part of that commitment, a regular schedule to inform about their progress or lack thereof must be made available, including public access to specific outputs. Documentation of how contributions were made, evaluated, and incorporated into the process is as important as the documentation related to dissenting and divergent views. Such mechanisms must follow accessibility standards and provide effective alternatives to facilitate participation in languages other than English.

Renata Mielli:
Robust accountability mechanisms should be part of all multilateral processes so that there are clear steps and deadlines for the implementation of recommendations. Concrete mechanisms for reflection about the impact of their decisions and the status of implementation of their recommendations are key for continuity. Efforts to accurately document each multilateral process should be made, including concrete steps to identify linkages with other similar processes. It is, therefore, essential to foster a safe, trustworthy, and fair environment where imbalances between participants are addressed. and civil society, the private sector, academia and technical community are able to meaningfully participate in multilateral processes. Governments have a key responsibility to guarantee the conditions for securing diversity and achieving robust multilateral process. 3.2 Guidelines for Multistakeholder Consensus Building and Decision Making, São Paulo Multistakeholder Guidelines. We offer and call upon the worldwide community to adopt and use a set of guidelines and related process steps, São Paulo Multistakeholder Guidelines, in Internet governance and digital policy processes that are distilled from existing foundational documents as well as from current good practice and experience. While no one sees size fits all, they shall help subnational, national, regional and global communities to build trust and establish and implement multistakeholder collaboration processes and mechanisms as well as to assess processes and mechanisms that are presented as being multistakeholder but are so only by their name. As discussed under 3.1, they shall also serve as inspiration for evolving and improving multilateral processes. The following guidelines are a complement to and operationalize the 2014 NetModial Internet Governance Process Principles. Due to the ever-involving nature of multistakeholder collaboration, these guidelines cannot be cast in stone and have to be considered as a living document. They need to keep evolving both in their practical implementation as in their concrete wording. Manau, could you follow?

Manal Ismail:
Sure. We therefore recommend that the IGF is best suited to act as a, sorry, we therefore recommend that the IGF is best suited to act as a depository, i.e. caretaker of this first set of guidelines, and we look forward to the IGF considering its implementation in its own processes and its further discussion and evolution. Such future discussions may cover inter alia the prioritization and or clustering of the guidelines, the development of metrics for the measurement of their application, systems for assessing and holding accountable multilateral and multistakeholder processes, and or developing further illustrative guidance on their applications such as toolkits, visuals, and flowcharts. Guidelines and process steps, guidelines for multistakeholder collaboration, consensus building, and decision making. Guidelines, one, multistakeholder processes should be mindful of power asymmetries between diverse stakeholders and in-power stakeholders by providing them with necessary information resources and skills to participate effectively, meaningfully, and sustainably. Transparency measures should aim for making policy processes known, accessible, comprehensible, and actionable. Two, multistakeholder processes should involve informed and deliberative discussion among stakeholders. Thank you. Meaningful dialogue is a conflict-preventing mechanism throughout all steps of the process. 3. Multi-stakeholder processes should strive to treat all stakeholders fairly and equitably, considering their respective needs, capacities, realities, and vulnerabilities. Stakeholders should participate on equal footing, treat one another with mutual respect, recognizing the value of diverse viewpoints and contributions and the different nature of their roles and responsibilities in an issue-specific manner. 4. Multi-stakeholder processes should be governed by the rule of law with respect to international human rights principles, including economic, social, cultural, civic, and political rights. 5. Multi-stakeholder processes should respect and value the linguistic diversity of participants and be accessible to all stakeholders, regardless of their background, status, or level of expertise. 6. All stakeholders should share responsibility and uphold accountability and transparency in their respective roles for the outcomes of the multi-stakeholder process, with legal and political accountability for protection of human rights remaining the primary responsibility of governments. Also recognizing the private sector’s responsibility to respect human rights in line with the UN guiding principles on business and human rights.

Valeria Betancourt:
7. Internet governance and digital policy processes should be agile and adaptable to changing circumstances, evolving technologies, emerging issues, and changing geopolitical dynamics. Mechanisms for resolving conflicts among stakeholders within collaborative multistakeholder processes should be in place to enable decision-making. Nine, a global multistakeholder approach to Internet governance and digital policy processes should recognize the need for collaborative action across national borders and stakeholder groups while duly considering and leveraging local and regional perspectives. Ten, decisions should consider the long-term implications of sustainability of outcomes for human rights and inclusive and sustainable development, as per the Tunis Agenda. Eleven, capacity development efforts that enhance the understanding and skills of stakeholders, particularly those from developing countries and underrepresented communities, should be in place through all the steps of a multistakeholder process. Twelve, cooperation and dialogue should actively be sought with other governance fora and processes in order to avoid duplication of efforts and to share outcomes, best practices, and lessons learned. Thirteen, collaboration processes should be oriented towards practical, actionable outcomes that lead to tangible results and positive changes for Internet governance and digital policy processes. Process steps-oriented guidelines. Recommended process steps for an open and inclusive multistakeholder process. First, scope the issue. Define the issue or set of issues to be considered by the multistakeholder collaboration process, considering as much as possible all affected perspectives. Two, identify stakeholders. Identify all relevant stakeholders as inclusively and flexibly as feasible, including individuals, groups, organizations, and communities affected by the decision or collaboration. Three, engage stakeholders. Actively engage all interested stakeholders through the process consistently and in a sustained fashion. Through methods such as public consultations, surveys, workshops, and fora to gather input and feedback. Four, share information. Provide clear and full information about the processes, objectives, and outcomes to ensure transparency and understanding among stakeholders, making full use of accessible digital records, including related process documentation. Five, ensure equitable participation. Ensure equitable participation of all relevant diverse perspectives and interests, including marginalized or underrepresented groups. Six, facilitate dialogue. Facilitate open dialogue, collaboration, and deliberation among and between relevant stakeholders, encouraging respectful communication and consensus building. Seven, prepare draft outcomes. Develop draft outcomes for consultation on the basis of dialogues between relevant stakeholders and consult with wider community of all interested stakeholders over results. Eight, factor in feedback from wider community. Adapt the draft outcomes, taking into account the inputs, steaming from the consultation, transparently reporting, and how inputs were considered and the corresponding reasons. Nine, open decision making. Use collaborative decision making processes that involve all the relevant stakeholders in identifying solutions, exploring tradeoffs, and reaching agreements. Ten, community powers. Submit final outcomes to the consideration of the wider community, providing for mechanisms empowering the wider community to react to outcomes that are inconsistent with the wider community interest. Eleven, implementation and accountability in decision making. Establish mechanisms for implementing decisions and holding stakeholders accountable for their commitments. Twelve, monitor and adapt. Monitor progress, evaluate outcomes, and be willing to adapt the process based on feedback and changing circumstances.

Timea Suto:
And section number four, inputs on ongoing processes. As stated in section 2.3 and 3.2, several processes are currently underway in the UN context regarding internet governance and digital policy processes. In particular, but not limited to the negotiations around the Global Digital Compact in the framework of the Summit of the Future with its Pact for the Future and the WSIS Plus 20 Review. They include recommendations and potential pathways for the further consolidation of an open, global, interoperable, secure and free internet and the broader digital policy ecosystem that contributes to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. As a unique gathering that seeks to articulate a concrete pathway for strengthening and improving multi-stakeholderism and internet governance and digital policy processes, NetMundial Plus 10, as a self-standing event, presents specific messages to these processes oriented to strengthen existing ones, optimize allocation of resources and ensure synergies, coordination and complementarity. In addition, there are numerous multilateral, regional, national and non-governmental processes that have inspired and would benefit from application of the principles and guidelines set out in this document.

Luciano Mazza:
4.1, Internet Governance Forum, IGF. The Internet Governance Forum consists of its annual event, intersessional work in the form of dynamic coalitions, best practice forums and policy networks, parliamentary and judiciary tracks, national and regional IGFs and youth initiatives at all levels. It brings together a variety of stakeholder groups from different parts of the world. The IGF has been an effective space for internet governance and digital public policy debates and cooperation, in spite of lacking the required financial resources to meet its mandate optimally. The IGF has the proven convening power and capacity to further explore and evolve innovative multi-stakeholder approaches to policy deliberation and decision-making processes. If strengthened, it could be consolidated as the preferred space for information sharing and improved coordination among digital governance processes. Its open nature, hybrid approach, and inclusive design facilitates widespread participation support. A strengthened IGF needs to continue addressing challenges and opportunities of emerging technologies and may need to develop and adopt new working methods that can deliver genuinely improved coordination, insight, and information sharing while avoiding conflicts with existing processes or creating new burdens to participating stakeholders and the UN system. A strengthened Internet Governance Forum, IGF, requires long-term sustainability to increase financial, technical, and human resources to be consolidated as a pivotal deliberative platform for coordinating participative debates on Internet and digital governance. Can provide cohesion and facilitate participation in the context of a distributed and growing digital governance ecosystem, ensuring more inclusive and diverse participation of underrepresented countries, communities, groups, and sectors, in particular from the global south, and requires improved procedures to guarantee inclusive, transparent, and accountable deliberation to generate both legitimacy and effective outcomes. An improvement on the dialogue and coordination between global, regional, and national IGFs is also needed in a way that the discussions and agendas can feed back such processes, aiming at establishing a continuity between them from a local to a global perspective.

Jordan Carter:
In its evolution, the potential of the IGF to deliver tangible outcomes such as evidence-based policy recommendations, best practice guidelines and pilot projects to test proposed solutions in order to build capacity and inform policymakers should be optimized. This will require the commitment and participation of all stakeholders. The IGF Secretariat, the IGF Leadership Panel and the Multistakeholder Advisory Group in the performance of their respective functions have a key role to play in that regard. Mechanisms for collaboration and information exchange with other international bodies and governance fora should be enhanced, as well as the IGF’s intersessional work. The strengthening of national and regional IGFs as spaces for the definition of common goals and challenges to inform the global IGF agenda contributes to tackling governance fragmentation. The IGF is the process in the UN system that is best positioned to address the gap between discussion and action by building closer ties with other organizations that are central to the functioning of the Internet, but also with multilateral institutions through ongoing innovation and experimentation within the IGF framework. The IGF should be renewed for at least ten years as the foremost global platform for broad-based public participation and dialogue in all Internet and related digital governance matters. Through strengthening the IGF, we would allow for the UN system to leverage on the legacy and relevance of the model while avoiding further fragmentation of Internet governance and institutions. The process for selecting the host country should be further transparent and take into account human rights, inclusivity, accessibility, and equitable conditions for attendance. Free, safe, and open participation should be available to all, especially historically excluded groups. Do you want to?

Min Jiang:
Section 4.2, Global Digital Compact. In order to set the grounds for an open, free, and secure digital future for all, as envisaged by the Global Digital Compact, NetMundial Plus10 recognizes the essential role of the Internet and digital technologies to build inclusive and participatory governance mechanisms, reaffirming the importance of a multi-stakeholder approach to Internet and digital governance and embedding it in its core. The recommendations emerging from NetMundial Plus10 towards strengthening the multi-stakeholder approach to the governance of digital technologies and development are a basis to ensure that policies and frameworks are transparent, inclusive, democratic, and reflect the diverse perspectives of all sections of society. In the perspective of adding value and filling the gaps in the current structures in the Internet Governance Forum, it is key that the GDC should avoid creating new structures or processes where existing ones could be strengthened and improved to support in monitoring the implementation and reviewing progress of the GDC. For many reasons, the IGF is the appropriate venue to follow up and monitor implementation of the GDC’s commitments. The topics set out in the GDC and driving so much of the focus on digital governance are already on the IGF agenda and have been for many years. The IGF, with its multi-stakeholder structures and mechanisms, should be used as a space to facilitate implementation, monitoring and following up of the global digital compact, working in collaboration with other UN agencies such as the ITU, UNDP, UNCTA, UNESCO and UNICEF through the WSIS Action Lines making use of the WSIS Forum and with the UN CSTD providing a platform for intergovernmental engagement in the monitoring and follow-up process. The GDC should avoid eroding the relevance of the IGF and the multi-stakeholder approach in Internet governance and digital policy processes. Through its implementation oriented to integrate its outcomes with the WSIS process and effective follow-up mechanisms building on existing fora, the GDC is an instrument to integrate digital into the acceleration of implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals building upon the TUNIS agenda.

Renata Mielli:
The GDC is an opportunity to put digital technologies on track for global efforts that pursue digital inclusion, cross-border cooperation and collaboration among the different stakeholders, the consolidation and effective application of existing human rights obligations including increases conditions underscoring the centrality of the international human rights law as both a foundation for and enabling environment to support all aspects of Internet governance and digital policy processes including through strengthening collaboration with GOHCHR and other UN human rights mechanisms. Session 4.3 WSIS plus 20 review. The world summit on the information society WSIS has served as a pivotal platform for fostering cooperation among countries, among governments, civil society, private sector, academia and technical communities to collectively address the opportunities and challenges brought about by the digital age for technical and public policy issues in digital governance. As the WSIS plus 20 milestones approach, a renewed commitment and innovative strategies for achieving digital inclusion in protecting human rights online is needed for leveraging these SDGs. The multi-stakeholder model which recognizes the intricate interplay of various sectors and actors to shape digital policy is fundamental in ensuring the WSIS remains a dynamic process based on development of global standards and cooperation mechanisms around key digital issues, agile and responsive to the expanding frontiers of new technologies. By building on a strong commitment to multi-stakeholderism, fostering cooperation and discussing the potential challenges, evolving technologies and trends within the digital landscape, WSIS can prepare for and look beyond the 20-year milestone. Taking this multi-stakeholder statement into account, the WSIS plus 20 review should further enhance the inclusivity, transparency and accountability of the internet governance and digital policy process and ensure its attention for environmental sustainability and emerging technologies shaping the digital future. This is our statement from the NetMundial. What? Where is the last line? You can read it.

Valeria Betancourt:
We call on the multistakeholder community to promote the outcomes of the NetMundial Plus10 event with respect to any national, regional, multilateral and multistakeholder processes they deem relevant. And that’s the end.