16 July 2010

Intervention by:

Mr. Ahmad Rajabi, Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran

at the Substantive Session of ECOSOC on Item 13 (b) – WSIS, IGF & Enhanced Cooperation

(New York – 16 July 2010) 

 

At the outset I would like to associate myself with the statement made by the distinguished Representative of Yemen on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

Mr. President’

I would like to refer to some elements on IGF.

1- The WSIS outcome documents phase 1 (Geneva, 2003) and (Tunis, 2005) should be adhered to, in particular on the question of the Internet Governance. We need to avoid interpretations that dilute the word and spirit of such documents. According to WSIS outcome documents “the Internet has evolved into a global facility and that the international management of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations.” The same final documents indicate that “Policy authority for Internet -related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States. They have rights and responsibilities for international Internet –related public policy issues.” And that all governments should have an equal role and responsibility for international Internet governance ” The WSIS outcome documents further recognize the need for enhanced cooperation in the future, to enable governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities, in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, but not in the day-to-day technical and operational matters, that do not impact on international public policy issues.” and that “the process towards enhanced cooperation, to be started by the UN Secretary -General, involving all relevant organizations by the end of the first quarter of 2006 ”.

2. IGF and Enhanced Cooperation are two separate, distinct and parallel, but Complementary mechanisms. They can not replace each other. The hard winning balanced compromise which was achieved in Tunis should be fully respected. We need to avoid further dilution of the compromise we achieved in Tunis.

3. Selective implementation of the Tunis compromise on the Internet Governance follow-up is indeed unfortunate. While the IGF process bestowed with all means and resources, a serious and real process requires, the process towards enhanced cooperation and the enhanced cooperation itself, despite expressed concerns of the governments in different occasions, has been denied of the same attention which is truly against the mandate given in paragraph 71 of the Tunis Agenda for Action. Interestingly the report of the UNSG on enhanced cooperation, which is miles away from a UN type full-fledge kind of a report, confirms such an understanding.

4. We agree with G77 that “the issue of continuation of the Internet Governance Forum is closely related to the establishment of the Enhanced Cooperation” as the processes, according to the Tunis documents are complementary. We need to commence the mechanism of Enhanced Cooperation itself. Further elaboration of the issue should clearly contain providing guidance on the questions of how and when the UNSG should do that. On the IGF, indeed extension of its mandate much depends on the reform of its working methods and we concur with the G77 that these are the elements of a single package. We further agree with the G77 that decisions on the above are upon the UNGA and should not be left to the IGF itself, as, according to the WSIS outcome documents , the IGF has no decision making power.

5. The Islamic Republic of Iran has been an active part of the negotiations of the CSTD on the draft resolution which is before us in the ECOSOC. The draft, though does not fully address our concerns, can be considered as a fairly good staring point to be able to honor the Tunis compromise in its entirety.

I thank you

Bookmark and Share