EuroDIG Extra on Global Digital Compact Zero Draft

We have drafted a list of guiding questions. Because it won’t be possible to discuss all these questions in the time available everyone is invited to use them as guiding focus and prepare for interventions in the three discussion parts. Please leave your comments below.
Kindly note: You need to register first to leave comments. (Approval will be given within 24 hours latest.) Log in to comment.
Introduction (5 minutes)
I. Summary of the GDC process and its importance (Sandra Hoferichter)
II. Structure of the zero draft (Mark Carvell)
Part 1. General comments on the zero daft (20 minutes)
Guiding questions:

1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 [Q.1] Are the five objectives and 10 principles (paragraphs 6-7) appropriate for the goal of an inclusive, open, safe and secure digital future for all that supports progress in achieving the sustainable development goals?

2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 [Q.2] Are there any missing aspects of digital cooperation that should be added to these objectives and principles?

3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 [Q.3] Does the text say enough about building on existing initiatives – including the WSIS – in order to avoid duplication?

4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 [Q.4] Does the zero draft successfully address gaps in Internet governance or create more risk of fragmentation of governance?

Part 2. Commitments and actions under each objective – paragraphs 8-51 (45 minutes)
Guiding questions:
Objective 1: Closing the digital divides – paragraphs 9-15
I. Connectivity

5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 [Q.1] Does the text focus on the right kind of financial and investment initiatives to connect the remaining 2.6 billion people?

6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 [Q.2] EuroDIG proposed the GDC should address environmental sustainability of ICTs. Is this covered sufficiently in this part of the text? d

II. Digital literacy, skills and capacities

7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 [Q.3] Are the goals and targets the right ones for achieving meaningful and safe use of the Internet?

III. Digital public goods and infrastructure

8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 [Q.4] Is the focus on standards and safeguards the right approach for promoting public trust and use of digital services?

9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 [Q.5] Are there best practices in Europe that can assist with the GDC’s goal of promoting multistakeholder partnerships for the development of digital public infrastructure?

Objective 2: Expanding inclusion in the digital economy – paragraphs 16-19
Access to digital technologies

10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 [Q.6] Does the text identify the most effective ways for achieving affordable and inclusive access to digital technologies?

11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 [Q.7] Is there enough emphasis on achieving greater security in the online environment?

Objective 3: Fostering an inclusive, open, safe and secure digital space – paragraphs 20-32
I. Human rights

12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 [Q.8] How can safeguards be established to prevent use of emerging technologies having adverse impacts on human rights? Should Europe support the proposal to create a UN Digital Human Rights Advisory Service?

13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 [Q.9] Is there sufficient clarity in the zero draft about how to achieve greater accountability in the digital technology sector for violations and abuses of human rights?

II. Internet governance

14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 [Q.10] Should the GDC say more in support of the multistakeholder model of Internet governance and cooperation at the regional and national level?

15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 [Q.11] Is the language of the commitment to refrain from Internet shutdowns strong enough?

III. Digital Trust and Safety

16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 [Q.12] Are the commitments to create greater trust and safety online strong enough, in particular for countering violence against women and girls, and preventing online child abuse?

17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 [Q.13] How can the proposals for urgent action to create industry accountable frameworks and reporting mechanisms be implemented in practice?

IV. Information integrity

18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 [Q.14] How can stakeholders including the technology companies assist governments with their commitments to counter disinformation and mitigate the risks of information manipulation and AI-generated deception, while also protecting fundamental media freedoms?

Objective 4: Advancing equitable international data governance – paragraphs 33-42
I. Data privacy and security

19 Leave a comment on paragraph 19 0 [Q.15] Do you agree with the commitment to develop new international and national data governance frameworks or are existing regional and international initiatives and guidelines sufficient for ensuring security and privacy?

II. Data exchanges and standards

20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 [Q.16] Are the approaches to addressing data divides and misuse of databases, by developing common definitions and standards the right ones?

III. Data for development

21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0 [Q.17] Is there European experience with data collection systems and data commons that can contribute to the creation and operation of  systems in support of sustainable development goals, environmental sustainability, disaster early warning and crisis response?

IV. Cross-border data flows

22 Leave a comment on paragraph 22 0 [Q.18] How can European stakeholders a) contribute to the development of solutions and best practice to address barriers to the free flow of data with trust (DFFT) and b) support the implementation of regional and global data frameworks?

Objective 5: Governing emerging technologies, including Artificial Intelligence, for humanity – paragraphs 43-51

23 Leave a comment on paragraph 23 0 [Q.19] Taking into account the number of existing initiatives relating to human-centric AI governance, do you support the proposal to establish under the auspices of the UN another body, the International Scientific Panel on AI?

24 Leave a comment on paragraph 24 0 [Q.20] Is the proposed launch of an annual global multistakeholder dialogue on AI governance necessary or can this role be undertaken by the Internet Governance Forum which is already discussing a wide range of AI-related issues?

Part 3. Follow up and review – paragraphs 52-65 (15 minutes)
Guiding questions:

25 Leave a comment on paragraph 25 0 [Q.1] Will the proposed follow up actions and financing arrangements strengthen multistakeholder collaboration and cooperation in order to achieve the GDC’s objectives?

26 Leave a comment on paragraph 26 0 [Q.2] Do the proposals take full account of the potential roles of the Internet Governance Forum and the WSIS Forum in advancing the GDC’s commitments and conducting reviews of progress in meeting objectives and specific targets?

27 Leave a comment on paragraph 27 0 [Q.3] Is there a role for national and regional IGFs – including EuroDIG – in the follow up and review phase?

28 Leave a comment on paragraph 28 0 [Q.4] Do you agree the recommendation that the UN establish a dedicated office for coordinating digital and emerging technology is necessary or should this role be undertaken by an existing process or forum established by the WSIS?

29 Leave a comment on paragraph 29 0 [Q.5] Does the proposal that the UN General Assembly convene a biennial multistakeholder High Level Review of the Global Digital Compact complement or reduce the role of the Internet Governance Forum?

Closing remarks (5 minutes)
Next steps (Sandra Hoferichter)
I. EuroDIG submits to the UN Co-facilitators a summary of stakeholders’ views and recommendations for finalising the text of the GDC.
II. EuroDIG provides an update for stakeholders on the GDC process in a session during the meeting in Vilnius.

Source: https://comment.eurodig.org/eurodig-extra-on-global-digital-compact-zero-draft/