The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> MODERATOR: Hello and welcome, everyone. Thank you for staying until the very end.
(Audio technical difficulties).
>> From the morning of the work that is done and the network we have gathered over 174 national regional initiatives. The shifts at the local level are essential to the overall effectiveness and this panel will address the pivotal discourse that happened at these local grass roots level and how this has shaped the evolution of Internet Governance and the multistakeholder model.
We have with us here an illustrious panel and more online as well who will bring you through all of the good discourses by each region, each initiative. With the diversity of speakers, please do remember to use your headset. I will turn to our first esteemed speaker.
I will give you a moment to put on your headset.
From the home region that we are here in the MENA region I am honored to introduce Mr. Chafic Chaya, Chair of the Lebanon IGF and part of Arab IGF. In the 20 years of WSIS where do we stand with respect to Internet Governance processes and the multistakeholder approach.
>> CHAFIC CHAYA: Thank you. Good afternoon. So I speak in Arabic.
Peace be upon you. I am honored to be part of this discussion today and to share with you the important role applied by the national regional initiatives in discussing the governance in the MENA region.
This is not just a narrative about governance. It is a transformation story and development story. While the MENA region is witnessing notable transformation from the conventional governance and into the multistakeholder governance model should focus on the conclusiveness and flexibility and cooperation.
The global WSIS, the WSIS has laid the foundation through the governance principles of multistakeholder and the different national initiatives and regulative initiatives have localized these principles and it fit with the needs of the region.
This region is not just the top of these frameworks, rather it has innovated to cope and to amend it according to the needs and opportunities.
What interests us today how this dealing between the conventional model and the multistakeholder model became major feature of such transformation, increasing momentum within these Conference processes and the United Nations to achieve the balance between two approaches and connect the stakeholders to adopt an innovative governance model which they are integrating and complementing each other.
These national initiatives became major pillars in this process whereby it lays the bridge which links between the different multistakeholder dialogues and the high level decision making process and contributes to involve the stakeholders, including the Government, technical community, Private Sector, Academia, civil society to work effectively to address the national priorities and regulatory authorities and to achieve the joint and common goals.
The increasing amount of this national and regional initiatives in this region such as Lebanon the IGF and that of Arab Internet Governance Forum or North Africa Internet Governance Forum and many others reflects the concern by the stakeholders to promote comprehensive governance including the Saudi IGF as a national, new national initiative which gives more momentum to these initiatives and promotes and pushes forward the common regional forward.
However, such initiatives, national initiatives and regional initiatives does not work in isolation or in silos. There are complementing initiatives for different stakeholders such as the activities by the community which are presented by the Arab ICC, ICANN and ISOC. There are a group of network operators in the MENOC, and we have the Middle East, and we have meetings, roundtable, Government roundtable meetings and they are designed for the countries. It all brings together the stakeholders to build capacities through providing the technical expertise and exchange of knowledge.
It ensures the integration of technical aspects and other aspects of the internet, the discussion about the governance which promotes the ecosystem of the Internet. At the end while we are looking forward within the 20 years of the first WSIS, we can today see the progress achieved so far, however, we are still at the beginning of the road to build a framework for the Internet Governance is that would be flexible, resilient, inclusive and ready for the requirements of our digital future. Thank you so much, Jennifer.
(Applause).
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much. It is so heartening to know that we have now the Saudi Arabia IGF and so much more coming in this MENA region. I think it's doing a lot to bring the discourse together, bringing the framework together collaboratively, and, of course, congratulations for that. It is so important for us to remember this is a region that has a lot to offer, a lot of knowledge, a lot of expertise, and the issues crucial to this region can be solved with all of these discussions in a multistakeholder manner, and going forward in that kind of framework as well.
I would like to turn now to the Europe region. It's my honour to introduce Mr. Giacomo Mazzone, part of the European dialogue on Internet Governance, EuroDIG and also Italian IGF. I know currently we have an ongoing targeted consultation on Internet Governance targeted by the European Commission. In that context, do you think that the multistakeholder approach can pave the way for inclusiveness and Internet resiliency in times of crisis?
>> GIACOMO MAZZONE: Thank you for giving me the floor. In Europe after the lesson of the war, we have understood that we cannot go by single nation, but we need to go through a permanent dialogue. So we have created two institutions that are, people do for us, one is the European Union that embraced 27 countries and the other is the Council of Europe that cover all of Europe.
So through these two institutions we have learned in the last 60 years that we have to go through consensus and trying to reach common positions. This started in a multilateral way, but then since 40 years this has been enlarged by both institutions to civil society, to Academia, to industry, to all of the components of those societies because most of the process need to be built on consensus.
Thanks to that, we are trying to tackle as was the question that how we can, if this help to build Internet resilience in time of crisis, for instance, we had the European elections in June this year. And we were all afraid that it could have an impact for the use of the artificial intelligence as a support for this information and trying to undermine the credibility of the elections.
Then it's been put in place a certain number of actions that have been able to give us the possibility to go through this election without having so much impact. For instance, there is a regulation that says that the platform needs to enforce as soon as possible the things when they are signaled that there is something going wrong.
So hard regulation is in place. Then there is moral persuasion regulation and code regulation that is the practice that has been put in place with the platform assigned with the European Commission. That means that the platform even if there is not a crime that is going on on the platform, but there is something that could be harmful, they have to behave and cooperate.
And then there are, this is not made by Ministry of Truth, but is made in cooperation with fact checkers that there are grassroots organisations in the traditional media that signal when there is a problem, and the problem then could be solved. This proved to be an efficient way to work and in fact the attack, there has been many attacks, but there has been under control and they didn't, aren't too much the election.
Now, currently, just to show you the model, how it works, the model, we have now to decide as European what will be the European position in the nations that are part of the European Union and the nations that are part of the Council of Europe position in the UN next year for the renewal of the mandate of the IGF and the WSS forum.
So what the commission has made, there was initial position of the Council that says we need to have a common position, and this principle needs to be defended, the multi‑stakeholderism, the integration, the cooperation, the non‑fragmentation on the Internet, et cetera. And then consultation has been launched just three weeks ago and will end the middle of January.
This consultation is open to all society, all components of society so at the end of the consultation, the position of the stakeholders will be integrated in a background paper. This paper will bring the attention of the institution and then it will be the basis for what the European Union and the single members will vote in regional assembly.
This is the best way we are trying to do in order to be multistakeholder, and to embrace all voices of the society.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much for giving us the overview of what Europe region and, of course, European Commission and also the European community is trying to do. I really like that your emphasis really is to go for consensus and common positions to defend multi‑stakeholderism in the crucial year ahead when we are looking towards WSIS+20 review.
Now, I'd like to turn over to the Africa region, always a young and vibrant region. It's my pleasure to introduce Lillian Nalwoga from the African IGF. With the continent's point of view, how can Internet Governance be more useful to all stakeholders so that they identify national regional spaces as a key venue for advocacy?
>> LILLIAN NALWOGA: Thank you so much, Jennifer. It's a pleasure to be here and to speak about vibrant continent. I just want to, I would like to first highlight, yes, the vibrancy comes in the number of initiatives that the continent has been able to achieve. To date we have approximately 36 national initiatives, and we have five regional initiatives representing the north, the east, the west, central, and south.
And in all of these processes, we are seeing the vibrancy of the community. We are seeing the multistakeholder approach coming into play. We are also seeing capacity building. So when we are looking at how can we make stakeholders, you know, in the, how can we utilize Internet Governance as a space for NRIs to be doing advocacy, I would say this comes from the vibrancy we are seeing in the communities.
But the one thing that has been able to be identified is the need for capacity building, and what we have seen is we have seen quite a number of regional scores, national scores and continental scores.
I think at the regional level, every Regional IGF within Africa has a school on Internet Governance, and that is the beginning point. At the continental level, we do have the Africa School on Internet Governance, and this has used, has been a space for building capacity of different stakeholders and it's not limiting to, say, civil society or Academia or Private Sector or Government. It is inclusive and it follows a bottom up approach.
And what I can say, I'm a beneficiary of the Africa, of the AFRISIG when it launched in 2013, and we have seen a number of different stakeholders from Government. So for us to say how can we use this space, first we are looking at capacity building, but the most recent initiative where we saw a gap was in how do we get legislators to pass inclusive policies, and understand tissues on Internet Governance and hence the Africa parliamentary network on internet governance was introduced, and I'm sure there is quite a big delegation from members of Parliament from Africa who have benefited from this.
So the approach here we are taking is we need to look at this at all angles if we are to say that Internet Governance, the entire ecosystem, how do we start with policy, we build the capacity of the stakeholders, the legislators, but also try to open it up in for different actors.
The other thing that I would like to do to mention is we need to be able to devote and track outcomes because when we started many years ago, the Internet Governance space was looked at as a talk show where we come and talk things, but recently we've been able to every meeting produce a key outcome document.
I think the next step right now is to be able to give, you know, be able to track and see how this is being implemented at a country level, at regional level, and this will be about to kind of use the space as a key plus for advocacy for the different stakeholders and the NRIs, thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much, Lillian. You are doing my job for me because it's a beautiful, perfect segue. I like your emphasis on capacity building. Africa as a continent is young and vibrant. We need to bring the young people with us. We need to bring other stakeholders who need to be in the space, in the Internet Governance discussion spaces, digital process discussion spaces to be able to understand first the concerns and the issues from the community, and also what Internet Governance is all about.
Now, I'd like to turn over to my home region, Asia‑Pacific. It's my honour to introduce Ms. Amrita Choudhury, part test India IGF and also Chair of the APR IGF multistakeholder steering group. In the APAC context, which voices should be in the model at the national, regional, and I guess local level as well, and how can they be effectively brought in?
>> AMRITA CHOUDHURY: Thank you, Jennifer. And APAC is very huge and diverse. We are not only in terms of countries, cultures, languages, economies but also the level of adoption of technology. So if you ask me the question, my first response would be everyone. But if I drill it down a bit more, I would say every relevant stakeholder who matters for that discussion.
So I will just take a step back and I will talk about what APR IGF has been doing is, one, not just working as the focal point for Regional IGF, but also to build capacity. For example, bringing in more youth, our fellowship is such that we try to have a better gender balance wherein we have more women coming in because we want, and especially from economies which are unrepresented, it could be the Pacific, it could be many countries from where we can bring.
Do note that some countries like Afghanistan we do try to bring out, but it's difficult because of sanctions. We do have more countries of that kind. We also try, the other thing which is important is to assist the national IGFs or youth IGFs in the country, and that's something which we feel is important because you could not only have the discussions at a national level, but also get some essence of what is important for that region which can feed in when we decide things, especially in APAC in our APRIGF themes and sub themes.
And also drill down the important things. For example, many times the national IGF, for example, may not know what the contemporary Internet Governance discussions globally are, which, for example, the Asia‑Pacific Regional IGF can know like what's happening in the GDC, which edition of the text is going on, what is concerning. So we try to demystify, pass it on to the community members who are involved because we believe the more information you pass on to the communities, they would be in a better position to decide.
We ask them for inputs. We also, you know, it is also important to encourage the schools of Internet Governance because that is where people can build their capacity. It's important that people understand the various nuances. Many times you will find the, especially the younger generation take everything for granted because they have got Internet technologies on their platter. But what goes behind it is something which they need to know, and once people know that why it matters, they start raising their voices.
So I think those things are important to increase the reach, create opportunities where they can come and participate like, for example, giving them the young voices a chance to come and participate, and share their views with people who may have been in the community for long without any prejudice or hesitation. I think that's important.
And also, disseminating information just like Lillian was saying, we have the outcome document which comes out from APrIGF, hopefully if some regulator, et cetera, pick it up. And also to build capacity amongst different groups, it could be parliamentarians, it could be others who actually need to build capacity on these things. I will stop at this. Thanks.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much, Amrita. I think Lillian has started and Amrita has emphasized the crucial role that schools of Internet Governance play as well in order to bring information, build up capacity impart knowledge, particularly I think I will go back to one small point that actually is not a small point, a very important point, that Lillian has raised about bringing in the legislators, the parliamentarians.
I know that there was a parliamentarian track here in Riyadh as well to have those creating policy making legislation to ensure that they create inclusive policies, inclusive legislations, and in, of course, with what Amrita mentioned to create opportunities for every voice that needs to be here at the table.
Now, I'm going to move to another region, the North America region. It's my honour to introduce Mr. Charles Noir, part of Canada IGF.
How is Internet Governance and the multistakeholder model evolving from your regional point of view? Charles, please.
>> CHARLES NOIR: Thanks. Thank you Jennifer. First of all, great to be here with you all in Saudi Arabia, and thank you to hosts for a wonderful meeting. CIRA is the Canadian registration authority and we are best known for CCLT.CA, and we have been the main sponsor and secretariat for the Canadian IGF since its beginning in 2019. So I'm sitting on the stage today and coming to you from a technical operator perspective, but talking about the IGF in Canada, of course, it's multistakeholder and that's where I want to start.
It's really about a community engagement in Canada as it is elsewhere. We are hearing on the stage, we focus on critical issues that affect the Internet or that the Internet is producing and generally we do that to identify hopefully some shared policy positions that we might take away from and at times to understand where different points of view are coming from.
There is very critical discussions going on in Canada as well as in other countries, of course, around the world and globally. We speak about a number of those, cybersecurity, for example, online harms was this year's focus as well, mis and disinformation, connectivity, all of the topics that we are covering here including artificial intelligence were certainly points that we cover within the IGF space in Canada.
And we believe that we are at an inflection point more generally within the global Internet Governance space because of the WSIS+20, because of GDC. Within Canada we are seeing for the first time a whole suite of regulation that will affect the Internet. So we are really engaging the community across the country from every stakeholder group to try to bring us together to inform and support our policymakers in their decision making, both within the domestic space but also globally in meetings like this, but also in negotiations like the WSIS+20 and what we are seeing in GDC.
So Canada has been a proud, huge supporter of the multistakeholder model both as an Internet community collectively all stakeholders, and I believe in our Government. We see WSIS+20 as an opportunity to reinforce and dedicate for the next hopefully next ten years, a commitment to multi‑stakeholderism including obviously the IGF.
Sure, there is room for improvement. We are, we want to recognize that the multistakeholder governance model today and the IGF, CIGF being part of that is the reason why we have an Internet that works like it does today from a technical operating perspective.
Yes, there are difficulties. We are encountering them, we are discussing them. We need to address them. But the reason why I can call someone on the other side of the world and instantaneously connect is because we have the multistakeholder model in action governing the technical layer of the Internet.
We see the CIGF and regional NRIs as really important in terms of supporting Governments, national Governments. When we see Governments engage in Internet policy, we believe that the Canadian IGF, for example, will be a source of information, a source of advice and guidance for policymakers making decisions about these important and crucial next steps in the phase of the Internet and how it's governed.
And from that we really see an opportunity to develop unified policy positions where we can all agree as all stakeholders, academic, Private Sector, technical community, et cetera, coming together so that we can focus on what we believe our priorities should be and what our Government's priorities should be in these spaces, particularly within the context of UN decision making and domestic legislation.
I would also like to add that we also see an opportunity within the technical community to organize as a community. The technical community, for example, like all stakeholder communities is very diverse, and we have worked with about 29 other technical operators around the world in every continent in coming together in a coalition called the technical community coalition for multi‑stakeholderism TCCM. And we see that as an opportunity to coordinate globally and it brings roots out of the IGF spirit and out of the notion that we are coming together as a stakeholder group to represent common positions that we believe should be considered during global negotiations.
Some of that was exemplified in our, in our input within the GDC context. And we will be very active in the WSIS as well as we move into the WSIS+20.
In terms, again, I'd like to just focus on the idea that multi‑stakeholderism, the IGF, the regional initiatives really have contributed. I want to leave with this note, have contributed and are the reason why we have the Internet we have today.
Again, we have issues. We are exploring them. We are discussing them, but fundamentally as a base idea and a base form of governance, this is what we want to see continue. This is what we want to see evolve.
The Canadian IGF is committed to that and certainly we are as a TTCM as a technical operator.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much, Charles. Thank you for highlighting the crucial role that the technical community plays and actually keeping the Internet on so we can have these discussions is the foundation where we build on all of these myriad of issues when we talk about Internet Governance without the Internet actually working. I don't think we have so much to talk about, right, at this point.
For the technical community as well, it is really crucial for them to focus on keeping the Internet remains open and free, global and secure, resilient, and interoperable so we can have all of these discussions that we are having right now. And last but not least, I would like to go to our region, GRULAC region. It's my honour to introduce Ms. Lillian Shamaro from the LAC IGF. I will give everybody a moment to put on headsets.
Lillian, what is the impact of NETmundial+10, WSIS+20 and the Global Digital Compact process on Internet Governance and the multistakeholder model and how can we use all of these principles to advance them?
>> Thank you. I'm going to speak in Spanish. Thank you so much for the invitation. Thanks, Jennifer, thanks to the Secretariat, and all of my colleagues present here.
We see that the WSIS, something we have been talking about lately next year in this space we will define the mandate for the IGF in the next years to come, and we believe that from our point of view in Latin America, we see a real opportunity in front of us because the IGF is a platform that's allowing us to do follow‑ups, and a review of all of the objectives of the GDC, and the action items of the WSIS, and we consider that this tool together with the structures that have been created for the Internet Governance in the next few years can be leveraged to discuss and assess the implementation of the agreements both in the national and the regional context as well as global.
Having all of this clear structure of all of the initiatives of governance, right. So we also want to share this experience, this very valuable experience, so inviting all of the stakeholders to the conversation. The GDC has presented some actionable steps that we can see in the local realities in the regional national levels, and when we talk about youth and other communities that are also having the dialogue regarding governance and focusing on the needs of certain communities.
So we are looking at the NRIs and we have seen an increase in the activity in these NRIs in terms of number of initiatives and number of people who are participating, and we've seen this going up and increasing a lot.
And we are really mentioned this before and my colleagues also mentioned this, this contribute for the capacity building, but also in the creation of forums for dialogue and conversation, and also to localize and see what are the needs in every different space according to different needs and contexts.
We think that this spaces contribute also to the deployment of technologies because this is when we can see how is technologies are implemented, how they are transformed, how they influence the lives of people, both in a regional and, regional and national level. And, of course, also with the focus of the multistakeholder approach. We are not having bias from one point of view whether we see different points of view.
The diversity of initiatives, I think, is something that is very beautiful to see. I see this group of people here in front of me, and all of the people who have been sharing space in this IGF, and I really see the beauty in these encounters in all of us talking about all of these transcendental topics.
It's not only the NRIs but having youth, the Portuguese speakers, the forum in the Caribbean that is one of the most long, the friends who have been working for the longest, and the commitments to follow the GDC initiatives like in data governance or AI, and other topics related to environment, migration, and other topics that are related to our context and these structures are shaped according to the diversity of territories and different communities.
So we should appreciate and leverage them as they are as a diversity they present. IGFs are a valuable space to have common dialogue, like the WECs and the GDC. We were invited to be creative and find new frameworks so I want to talk about new world dialogues that are inviting us to have new governance models, and taking this multistakeholder models, and then having dialogue so that we create the open, collaborative open Internet that we want.
These dialogues can be the basis for experimental collaboration, and also have this governance frameworks that can allow us to have a better decision making, make more concrete proposals, and create action steps to advance to the Internet we want and we can overcome the current challenges we face.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Lillian. I think your ending was actually very perfect, to have common dialogue and celebrate the diversity of inputs we bring from across the entire globe with all of the regions included.
Now, I started off the session by staying this network, this NRI network is 174 initiatives and counting. There are many in this room. There are many online. We would love to hear from you. So I think we have actually roaming mics in the room, technical persons please indicate if that's possible, but we would like to open the floor to people who have reactions and also can share what their region, their national initiative is actually doing right now, the impacts of multistakeholder processes, dialogue is happening at the local and grass roots level, what they are hoping to achieve, especially in terms of input into the WSIS+20 review process next year.
I think we heard in every single session almost in this Riyadh meeting that there is need to have dialogue. There is need to have common positions to defend multistakeholder processes when we are talking about Internet Governance, when we are talking about digital governance as well.
So I would like to also introduce, we have our online moderator, paid electro, Pedro will be the person looking at our online participants who are probably very involved with the national, regional and youth initiatives in their home economies as well. So, please, Pedro, let me know if there is anything online as well from this NRI network from the greater communities that go to she's different meetings, go to these initiatives or even just tuning in remotely all across the globe so this meeting in Riyadh. Are we able to hear Pedro?
If we are not able to hear Pedro, I will come back to him, and actually I will drill down a little more on what we have heard so far on our panelists. Maybe this will inspire more input from those who are actually thinking about what their meetings in their home countries, in their home economies are actually having. I think that there is a lot of local issues, a lot of regional issues that are discussed in NRI meetings that sometimes do not make their way all the way to the global IGF at the annual meeting.
Of course, it's always competitive when you are looking at the scheduling, but is there something that is very unique to your region perhaps that you think is very important to bring up to the global level that hasn't had an opportunity quite yet, especially when we are looking into WSIS+20 review next year, and also impacting the evolution of how we are discussing? I don't know if any of our panelists up here would like to take a stab.
>> CHAFIC CHAYA: Thank you, Jennifer. First, thank you for Saudi Arabia and for hosting this IGF in this region. This is very important step and very important initiative to get the IGF to our region share with the global IGF what the challenges we are facing. As you know, each region has its own challenge, and while the European or the western countries, they are now looking after AI and looking after Internet of Things and Smart Cities, we are still having some countries in this region.
They don't have the basic infrastructure connect people. So our priority is to give the connectivity to these people to connect. We know from the ITU that there is still 2.6 billion unconnected people, and most of them are in Africa, which is our, the region nearby.
So the main the importance of have these events in this region is to get the voices of these countries up to the global level so they can be taken in consideration because once again, our challenge is totally different from other countries or other regional challenges. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Chafic. I know that you have highlighted that there are 2.6 billion unconnected. That is a number that is really also central to the Africa region and Asia‑Pacific region. I don't know if Amrit watch would like to expand on that challenge as well when looking at Asia‑Pacific.
>> AMRITA CHOUDHURY: Yes, thank you. I think there one beauty of the NRIs is that while there are many issues which may be very endemic to a country or region, there are challenges in most of the region in some context or form. As Chafic mentioned access is one. Basic infrastructure. For example, there are countries, as I mentioned in my initial remark, Asia‑Pacific is very diverse. You have extremely developed countries, and you have countries where the networks have still not, are not working or cannot work due to sanctions, et cetera, as in they are working but not.
We had the Pacific Islands who have different challenges because of climate change, et cetera, there is water rising. There are other issues which are happening. So it's, there are different challenges people do bring in, but, again, how you have that assimilated is difficult because every region has different issues. Access is difficult. Multilingualism is important. If I look at the countries, country like India has 22 official languages, let alone unofficial.
Similarly in many parts of Asia‑Pacific, language is an issue, having everything in those languages access, you know, basic access is an issue for people. Rights to even access it, for example, I will come back to Afghanistan, women do not have any rights. Women do not even have right to an Internet device. That's a challenge when we are talking about so many things achieving SDG goals.
So those are diverse, we try to bring it up and see what can be done, there are higher level issues and deep rooted issues that needs to be worked, like anything.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, I like that you brought up also multilingualisms a challenge and also a strength in the diversity of the languages that we are allowed to speak. I know here we have translation in the six UN languages so you heard Rafic speak in era big and Lillian be able to speak in Spanish, and for myself, and I just said I'm very lucky to be able to use my language, Chinese, to be able to speak to everyone, but that is not the case for every single language that you see, that's represented by the people you see here on the panel.
And I'm sure many, many more in the audience. I know that we probably in the audience because the light is now shining into my eyes and I cannot see your faces, but there must be many NRI and youth initiatives representatives from Francophonie countries who do have a lot to contribute and input on.
I urge you also to raise your hand if you have inputs that you would like to make during this national regional subregional youth initiative main session to share with us your issues and how Internet Governance and especially the multistakeholder process has evolved discussion in your home economies and, of course, we welcome you to speak in your language, in French as well.
I would like to now go back again to see if we are able to unmute Mr. Pedro, who is our online moderator.
>> On line monitor: We have one question in the chat in order to alternate between on site and online question, we can go with Dr. Jimson, and then go to the other questions posed if there is no onsite question. Can I go in that direction, Jennifer?
>> MODERATOR: Yes, we can take the online intervention. I see hands up. Pedro I will allow you to unmute them or tech can unmute them and you can moderate the online inputs, news.
>> Online moderator: Can you unmute Dr. Jimson.
>> MODERATOR: I see him in the room. He is online and in the room which is amazing. Please go ahead.
>> AUDIENCE: Okay. Good evening, everybody. Oh, still afternoon. I want to, first off, I want to say Jimson Olufuye, the Chair of Africa ICT Alliance, and I'm a Private Sector person and I run a private sector concern organisation. I want to commend the MAG. The MAG have done fantastic work. We really appreciate all of your work, all of your effort across the world. We appreciate you very much, and Jennifer in particular, your work in IGF SA, we appreciate it for the global community.
I have two questions. The first one is connected with what you mentioned about NETmundial multistakeholder guidelines. We have been using the guidelines because I believe it has the capacity to ensure that every stakeholder concern is brought to the table and when we have all stakeholders at the table, we can easily tackle all our societal challenges together because there will be ownership.
Secondly, we also talk about the Global Digital Compact. There are two outcomes of the WSIS, 2005 Tunis Agenda. The first has been the IGF and it has been successful and we appreciate the effort. The seconds one has to did with enhanced cooperation on public policy matters, it's an opportunity for Government to be able to at least govern Internet policy issues in the same room, be in the same room with the stakeholder.
So that's, the cooperation just came to fruition since 2005 just September last year when the global community, the world leaders agreed to Pact for the Future where we have the Global Leader compact. Welcome.
Now, going forward, the question is from your experiences across the continent, what do you think about how we will proceed to implement the Global Digital Compact in our respective regions and countries? Should it be integrated into IGF because IGF is successful or should we create another stream of engagement for that? Thank you very much.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. I will allow my panelists to give it a little bit of thought. I will go straight actually to our French intervention I believe online. I will go to Pedro first and we can go back to the panelists.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: We have questions in chat as well, but we will do that after they make their contribution.
>> AUDIENCE: My name is Nnenna. Can everyone hear me? I will speak in French so I'm giving half a second for people to grab their headsets. Hello. I'm Nina, I come from the Internet I am on every code. I would like to raise the attention on sustainability of the Secretariat of the IGF.
In our country, we have this multistakeholder approach, but after two years we are tired. And when we have this problem, the Secretariat, the Government, the society, the Private Sector speak all of the time, at the same time, so here it would be good to share what is the experience that we have when we talk about Secretariat of the forum, when we talk about regional initiatives and national initiatives.
I'm talking about that because I'm in West Africa. We have different experiences. We get different international aides, financial aid but that can go in the pocket of Government so we have recommended to have a secretariat, but taking into account the agility, do we have to ask the social society to get this finance, this money on our account?
So it's not easy to manage. So I would like to ask to the panelists what is your experience, what do you recommend us to have sustainable Secretariat and also to have a body who could get this aid, this monetary aid to support our activities in the framework of the capacity, of different capacities of the Secretariat in the framework of the forum. Thank you very much.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Nnenna, thank you. I speak ‑‑ well, I will presume to use my moderator prerogative to say that those of us sitting on the stage are no more experts than you in the room. I hear questions about how regionals or even nationals will look into implementing all of the different things recommended in Global Digital Compact. I heard about the question about have we used the São Paulo guidelines coming out of NETmundial plus 10 and how we have done so and have we heard the importance of the sustainability monetary, the financial sustainability of the IGF Secretariat.
I see there is a line at the podium. So I will go straight to our next speaker. Please introduce yourself.
>> AUDIENCE: Thank you very much. I'm Nigel Cassemere from the Caribbean Telecommunications Union. We coordinated the Caribbean IGF since 2005, and basically Jennifer to respond to what you asked about getting experiences from around the world, the Caribbean is part of the GRULAC and Lillian did mention this IGF in her presentation, but basically just to say the challenge we have is, where as the AP is large and diverse, the Caribbean is small and diverse, you know, lots of small countries, restricted resources, so on, but just within the Caribbean, there are four different language groups.
I myself am from more the English speaking language group and notwithstanding we have a Caribbean IGF, we have had participation from some of the other language groups but it has been to date in English. This, in 2025 we proposed to have, we plan to have our 21st CIGF in Cuba, which would be a stretch for us, and we would be learning but it would be a more inclusive type of an approach, so we will probably have a bilingual CIGF for the first time.
And then beyond say regional communities of interest, we've also reached out to other communities of interest, like we are all small islands developing states and we have started a liaison with Small Island Developing States around the world, the Pacific in particular has been a most reliable partner to start a Small Island Developing States IGF and we have had two settings of that so far.
That has tended to be more virtual than in person, but it helps us to share our experience with Small Island Developing States around the world who maybe don't have all of the resources it investigate all of these Internet Governance matters and so on.
And one of the products of our C IGF in fact has been a policy framework that we have given to help inform our Governments in terms of developing Internet Governance policies. So just, just to give you an idea of what some, what has been happening, some of these challenges that we face in our region and what we have been doing so far. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Nigel, especially in highlighting that there is a small island developing states IGF so SIDS IGF are looking at issues that are very unique to these states and also congratulations for the next edition being in Cuba. I'm sure it's going to be very interesting and very rewarding to have a Regional Meeting there or subregional meeting there as well.
I'm going to see if there is any online interventions. I don't see hands so I will go to the next speaker in the podium.
>> AUDIENCE: My name is Anna lease Williams, I was the 2024 Chair of the Australian IGF. And I'm just going back to your comment or question earlier about what NRIs are want going into WSIS. We held the Australian IGF in October of this year, and for the first time we developed a position statement, like an output of the IGF. It was drafted by the Committee. We put it out for input from stakeholders and it was agreed by, adopted by consensus at the IGF, and it is a position statement on what the Australian Internet community wants from the WSIS process.
We called on the WSIS review process to adopt meaningful multistakeholder processes consistent with the Sao Paulo multistakeholder guidelines. We called on the Australian Government to ensure the full participation of Australia's multistakeholder community in Australia's national preparations for the WSIS. And in terms of the IGF, we called for its continuation of its mandate, and we also called on all stakeholders, particularly Governments in the Private Sector to fully participate in the IGF and commit to its ongoing financial sustainability and to consider ways to strengthen and enhance the value and efficacy of the IGF both as a discussion infrastructure and as a key source of information on digital policy issues beyond WSIS.
I just wanted to flag that we had done that in Australia. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: I think it's really important to highlight the different national meetings that have looked into this and it's good that the AUIGF has had this output document looking at WSIS+20 inputs and how the Sao Paulo guidelines can be utilized and how the GDC or implementation of parts of it can be looked at for the Australian community.
I would like to encourage also all of those participants in the Pacific IGF to also input as well. I know there are many, many issues near and dear to your region that are not reflected and are quite unique to the Pacific region as well. I would like to take a look to see if we have any more online. I don't believe there are any new hands up.
I'd like to go to our next speaker at the podium.
>> My name is Vetron, I am the Executive Director of the Internet jurisdiction Policy Network. I am happy to have been one of the co‑initiators of both the European IGF, the EuroDIG and the French IGF. One, I find fascinating that from the bottom up, the IGF has transformed into what is today a network of IGF, and so the annual global IGF is the global gathering of the network of IGFs and we should flip the thinking and not see the IGF as proliferating at national level, but we should consider that the global meeting is the moment where the input coming from the IGFs at the national and regional level can be clustered and analyzed together so that like a respiration it goes back to them afterward.
The second thing is as I mentioned in the previous session, the IGF at the global level, Nnenna was mentioning it is a problem at the local level as well, is usually caught in a catch 22 situation between the lack of resources and the difficulty to articulate an ambitious vision because if you don't have the resources, it's hard to have a vision and implement it, but if you don't have the vision, you cannot muster the resources.
In that regard, as Charles was mentioning, I want to give credit to in many parts of the world the local country code level domain, ccTLD operators who have been instrumental, no the only actors, but instrumental sometimes in providing not only financial but logistical and in large parts substantial support to the local IGFs. And I would like just to put on the table the fact that as ICANN is basically the global tax collector for the management of the Domain Name System and the global public resource, the more it can do to support the global IGF, the better.
But the final point I want to make is, and I'm glad to have the opportunity to do it here, is that there is one topic that we will all have to address next year, which is what is the expanded renewed but also revised mandate of the global IGF, and what is it's further institutionalization and for that I suggest and I would be happy to have the feedback from people on the panel if they are willing. I think having an engagement of the NRIs in a consultation during 2025 on what do they think should be the process to move beyond the recon duction or not but to address the question what is the next institutional step for the IGF would be an amazing approach and I would be really looking forward to seeing what the local and Regional IGFs have to contribute to this discussion.
>> CHAIR: Thank you Bertrand. I will pause quickly to see if there are two reacts from the panel from all of the questions we have heard so far.
>> I would like to answer what has been said at the beginning and now. The GDC needs us, at the moment the process has been conducted in New York by the people following the United Nations General Assembly that most cases are not very well connected. I would not say more than that, but at least they are not very well connected with the reality in the world.
And the only place where ideas can be tested, can be put on the reality, can be checked is this. The IGF during these 20 years we have all together built something that is very valuable, not only the NRI network that is very important because it gives the possibility to consult directly in each country of the world or more, most of the other countries of the world at the regional level what can be done, what cannot be done, but we have the dynamic coalitions. That means vested interest with a specific purpose that stress the specific aspect of the Internet Governance problematics and we have the Policy Network.
The policy network not only because I'm Chair of one of the Policy Networks, but the Policy Network is a place where you can grassroot collecting best practices that exist and this best practice can be eventually used to contaminate the rest of the world.
So we have free tools that are the only ones that can bring down to earth the principles that are in the Global Digital Compact. If this will not happen, then it will be another negotiation in New York about international treaties that are trying to regulate something, you remember gull liver Travels, the people that were up in the world, in the sky and were not seeing the earth and where is hiding the earth. They need us.
We have simply to remember that.
>> MODERATOR: Giacomo, and then we will go to Pedro online.
>> Jimson just to respond to your point is perhaps you could refer to a document which the MAG IGF Working Group on strategy has prepared as a vision document of what the IGF can do to support the various processes, like, for example, be an effective coordination space for different follow‑ups on digital policies, the Policy Network on AI is already having a lot of discussions. So it could be further enhanced.
So not only for Jimson, the others could look at this document which talks about what the IGF could do and how it can strengthen and how it can help. That, anyone can look at and it's available in the IGF website.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Amrita for stressing that recent publication on the Working Group on strategies document. I would like to go to Pedro who has interventions from online.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: Thanks, Jennifer, we have two questions and one comment. The first one is from Colombia IGF he is asking what accommodations would you highlight from your local experience to bring the results to decision makers? We also have a question from the Gana what strategies can NRIs present under groups such as women, youth and marginalized communities in digital world? Then we have comments by to resolve the issues of IGF Secretariat to concentration on re, and strengthening the operational capacity by upgrading infrastructure and outsourcing non‑core functions.
Staff capacity can be improved through training and knowledge sharing programmes while community involvement can be boosted by leveraging volunteers, interns and partnerships. Streamline governance stakeholder feedback and advocacy efforts promote the IGF's mission. This include broader support. And then we have another two comments, but we will leave that after the on site participations.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Pedro, I think I do see a hand online if we can get to the vocal intervention. If you can unmute our participant who has their hand up online.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: I will ask to go unmute but it takes a few seconds. I think we can get on site participation while this is happening.
>> AUDIENCE: Hello. I am Sumi, I am not come on site, I am online participant all event, fully participant, so internally problems of my voices. So I am only participant text and necessary to participant mention create event yesterday and GDC, but no support that body today, so I started to permanently deleting events, but I have create CRI, and I can register in members in the UN. So participant unlikely his involvement must enter room is unlikely in text so I not participate in full, but I go remark on event. Thank you all to introduce to myself, myself, Sumi Bhuta, I have UN and EU membership. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, and I think we will now turn back to the participants on the floor. I do see that there is a line, our next speaker, please.
>> AUDIENCE: Hello, everyone. Thank you, Jennifer, for giving me a chance to speak and also thank you all panelists for sharing your experiences and anyway, this is Piafor Nimer, youth coordinator of the youth IGF in Southeast Asia youth IGF. I would like to share my experience while we are trying to foster the collaboration and trying to sustain the youth initiative during this year firstly.
It has been challenging a lot to us at the local level to foster the collaboration because of our current situation and even it is difficult to advise those who are from the Government stakeholders as we have yet to ‑‑ we have a challenge to define the Government stakeholders in this state, but so far as Y IGF member, we mostly focuses on the capacity building and also trying to get more input from the different regions and state highlighting about the Internet issue, what is happening there.
That was even though all of our, we started our youth initiative with eleven organising Committee Members. It is getting like, it's like lay to be many young people have their own channels like filling their basic needs and continuing their education. Because most are student and only a few people are young professionals.
So we are facing such challenges and even within the theme to collaborate and finance resources as well as turning the Thai MRS to make this yearly. It has been a challenge to coordinate the monthly meeting and also finding the resources and even though we are your recognized initiative is, we are having a challenge to find the financial resources as we are not registered in any, any title at local, and also when we tried to initiate like subregional youth initiative, the public is very clear that we already have Asia‑Pacific Y IGF. We wanted to put more concrete input and feed into, feed into related to the Internet cases in issues that are happening at the subregional level as well.
For that purpose, we try to gather the organising Committee Members and this year we could make an establish very first and foremost South Asia Y IGF forum. Luckily with the support of the United Nations IGF secretariat and also South Asia IGF secretariat as well as other supporters like IGF SA, we could smoothly organize our very first and foremost subregional youth IGF forum this year.
So far they are still having the challenge like for the collaboration among the Youth Committee in the South Asia region because maybe this is, maybe because this is our very first year and we need to think about what would be the best way to approach countries like Malaysia, Laos, and Vietnam to invite Youth Committee members on board in our Committee. That would be great if someone who are from these countries are also attending at the UN IGF.
Right now we will be happy to talk more about our collaboration for next year. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Piao for bringing to light how difficult it is for many in many parts of the world to be able to meet, to be able to discuss these issues. Thank you for highlighting that youth IGF in Myanmar is still very vibrant and they have their meetings and congratulations to the southeast Asian youth IGF for their initial meeting. I think both Jinson and several others have mentioned the IGF support association which allows for some seed funding to give to initiatives just starting out to be able to meet, to be able to have platforms to meet.
I am going to go to the next person in the floor, our next speaker and then I will go to Pedro online. Please go ahead.
>> AUDIENCE: Thank you so much the panelists for your talk. And my name is Nassar, Dr. Nassar Nicholas from the Tanzania IGF, and I would like to make a few interventions. Number one is that the NRIs is a grass roots part of the global IGF, and we are making a lot of progress in terms of organising, bringing the all stakeholders together to not only do, you know, dialogue, but to engage in critical actions that we need to do as a use cases.
And I would like to invite every single NRI that is present to start engaging the NRI network in collaborative projects that can highlight our work in terms of policy and actions that we need to do at the grass roots level.
That will be my intervention number one.
Number two, it's not easy sometimes to bring all of the key multistakeholder together for, I will give an example of Tanzania where I come from, it has been taking a while to bring all of the key multistakeholders in terms of actually having the critical discussion on the issues of infrastructure, digital services and so on, so forth.
We don't have to be discouraged when at times we reach out to stakeholders and they don't come on board.
We have to continue our work because our work, I know it is noble work in terms of making sure that what we are doing on the ground translates to the global IGF discussions that we are having today.
Number three, I would like to give an example of the progresses that we are doing in Tanzania as NRI. We are taking several initiatives as Tanzania IGF. Number one is we are working with Government, Tanzania and other multistakeholder within our space to form various Working Groups that are necessary to continue the progress that we've had in Tanzania. For example, in Tanzania now, our population is about 63 million people.
And those who have been connected online about 30 million or so, roughly half of the population is connected.
But we still have challenges, for example, having affordable and meaningful Internet access. This kind of work requires all key stakeholders to work together to collaborate in order to be able to serve these challenges. There is a saying in Africa that it takes a village to raise a child, and this is very true.
It takes multistakeholder cooperation, multistakeholder collaboration to make sure that we connect everyone to digital opportunities online. So I know the NRIs just like Tanzania IGF we are doing a lot on the ground, but one take away that I would like for each one of us to take from this global IGF is to begin as NRIs to collaborate in terms of projects on two areas.
Number one, on policy, policies that are actually have been proven to work, and that can be replicated in, within our NRI spaces, and number two is to do and collaborate on projects that are doable. That we can be able to do.
For example, our Tanzania IGF has been working with Internet Society Tanzania chapter on a project called Tanzania digital inclusion project where we have been able to train about 7,000 girls on STEM. We have been able to connect about 800 citizens to affordable and meaningful Internet and ten schools have been connected to broadband Internet and also with the same kind of project, we have been ‑‑
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Nassar, so much for telling us all of the work that Tanzania IGF is doing and, of course, your take away for that it takes a village to raise a child, it takes multistakeholder model to make all of this work.
I would like now to turn to Pedro who was several comments online. Please.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: Yes, I will read two of them, I also noticed that NETmundial and Sao Paulo were mentioned and we have two people that were involved in the work on site on the line. I just mention that to Jennifer. First, the comment that's were made in the chat, the person is from a company for Liberia IGF. He wanted to present points on the progress of the Liberia IGF that has been hosting its Fifth Edition this year with Governments and local stakeholders fully involved in a multistakeholder style and having increased their advocacy level to see the level of progress with policy and personal data and cybersecurity strategies that are currently making developments and this regulatory participation has led to the validation of the draft of protection of rights and they sustain advocacy in issues with the collaboration being sustained we support IGF supported by the post and telecommunications.
This collective effort has led to a very visible leverage and also Liberia hosting its first forum in the NIU region as part of the IGF. We also have a comment about the importance of Internet Governance at Government level being realized in addition to individuals being recognized at the global level.
The Pakistani school of Internet Governance is playing its role since 10 years in different cities of the country. There is an inventory of work related to Internet policies that has also been keeping the pace in addition to planning. Rest assured the enablement of effective ecosystems. There is a challenge to retain the talents in this space, and to ensure engagement of individuals after capacity building. Where universal meaningful connection without censorship for going in view of this information, fake news, et cetera, are big challenges nowadays.
There has been extremely, it has been extremely hard for especially Governments to keep the balance in digital policies. AI has been the next big thing which is a big challenge for Governments in terms of capacity building, development, deployment, management and issues of governance and oversight.
So with those two questions, I think we can go back inside. So back to you, Jennifer.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much Pedro. As you can see there are so many good inputs and we have so little time together. I will go back to the floor now. I see there still is a line if you could keep your intervention within a minute that would be appreciated. Next speaker, please.
>> AUDIENCE: Hello. Thank you Jennifer. This is Andrew representing the regulators office in Vanuatu and also Chair of Pacific IGF. The regulators office has been supporting Pacific IGF over the last years. That started in 2011 and I want to acknowledge my Pacific colleagues who have started this initiative in the Pacific back then. Today the Pacific IGF secretariat is with the Pacific Island Chapter of the Internet Society. This year we have, Pacific IGF was held in Wellington and our theme was strengthening digital governance, resilience, and resilience in the Pacific Islands.
And we were supported by the order, the WM authority of Australia and dot NSAID, UNESCO and European Union through the project, and I think there is some relevance in the theme that we had this year. As we speak now, I had disasters two days ago in my country and, of course, total outage of communications for the last two days.
And thankfully, we are thankful for the Leo technology that that currently we have Star Link, some Star Link set up in the country, and also the Government is in discussion with Star Link to set up public Internet access around the town.
So it is becoming a reality, and resilience for us. There are two things probably I want to highlight here before I finish, one is I think we need more support in policy frameworks for responses in times of disaster in the Pacific Islands. As you know, over the last few years we have had a lot of disasters like the eruptions in Tonga, and other cyclones and the disasters so frequent, and I think we need the right policies in this direction.
And the second and last point is I believe probably this room to formalize the NRIs to align with the global IGF, and increase support as we look forward for the next 20 years. Just to let you know that Pacific IGF 2025 will be in Samoa, and feel free to join us. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. It's good to hear from the Pacific IGF point of view, and congratulations to Samoa for hosting the next edition of the Pacific IGF. I know that we have two more here on the ground and we have one online. We will take one more speaker here with us. Please keep your intervention very short, within a minute if you can. Thank you so much.
>> AUDIENCE: Thank you everyone. This is Jasmine E man ko from Hong Kong Y IGF. We have been documenting achievement on report so you can go to HKQ.Asia to see but I want to share about the challenge that I find critical and I believe it's not only the challenge that we face. It's about to engage with the Government. This is why this year after several years of not having IGF in Hong Kong, we make a theme called smart economy. We try to speak the language of Governments, but then we still find it difficult to get them engaged.
So everything, the multistakeholder that we engage in HKIGF we have stakeholders that is Government which is a pity. So I want to share about the challenge and hopefully we get insight and success case from other regions. Thank you very much.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much Jasmine. Thank you for giving the views from the Hong Kong youth IGF. I would like to go straight to online, Pedro, I believe we have an intervention.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: We have an intervention from Nigel, I think you have permission to open your Mike,.
>> NIGEL HICKSON: Good afternoon, it's an absolute pleasure to take part I'm a member of the UKIGF, and it's wonderful to hear so many NRIs. I will be brief. The Global Digital Compact has set us on the right path as we go forward recognizing the immense value of the IGF. We need to build on that in the WSIS+20 process and we should take nothing for granted it's a new debate.
Secondly, the UN IGF has done such immense work, I think it should be credited with a longer mandate, a mandate that extends beyond 10 or 20 years. It has so much to contribute to the Internet debate.
Thirdly, the NRIs need to be recognized in the WSIS+20 Resolution that's adopted. The NRIs are the legitimacy of multistakeholder processes. The NRIs are an inspiration and they need to be recognized for the tremendous work they do in bringing people together to have discussions and coordinate and contribute to the challenges and opportunities we have today. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you Nigel. In the interest of time, our last speaker is here in the ground, please keep your interventions within one minute. Thank you very much.
>> AUDIENCE: Through so much, I'm Chair of the North African IGF and allow me to make my intervention in Arabic.
Peace be upon you. I am very proud today about two things here. We are an Arabic country that actually is hosting this IGF, this is the second time if I remember very well. I Egypt, and the North African IGF we have a very good position there we are actually cooperating with a lot of entities in our countries and in the northern area of Africa. The Arabic participation here that we see that is an excellent one. In fact, it is very good really as I said, good preparation and that it is hosted here in an Arabic country, and so all of the work that we are doing to unify our efforts.
My friends here, Dr. Rafik is a participant. We have an organized a presume before this forum to prepare for the Arabic participation, and the forum for youth of Africa, we have challenges. We have dreams.
We try all of the time to enhance the people of concern, the most important thing is the programmes of capacity building. We try all of the time training all of the time at different times like cybersecurity and technology and other technologies, and also bring Internet to school and there will be also different other efforts.
We also give trainings for women and youth. Also we have an idea to give trainings also for the elderly so that to make them aware of this new technologies and to make them a part of this digital world. All of these dreams that we are dreaming today, there is, we will have, we have an obstacle, big obstacle that is the financial obstacle.
Let me thank everyone. IGF and Nir and others are trying to help us through the programmes but all of the time with these dreams that we have here and elsewhere is the monetary issue all of the time. Thank you very much.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Our final speaker on the floor, if you can keep your intervention within one minute that would be so much appreciated.
>> AUDIENCE: Thank you so much. Before I start, ask my question, let me introduce myself. I am Mary Enrica, I am from Timor‑Leste, and I am one of the IGF fellow. Here before I start my question, here I also want to say thank you to the IGF to give me the opportunity to attend the IGF and to give the opportunity for Timor‑Leste people also to attend IGF. This is my question.
Timor‑Leste doesn't have local IGF so how can we establish an IGF in our country, and what we need to prepare first to have our own local IGF in our country? Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Welcome from Timor‑Leste coming from the IGF If you need information on how to start an IGF, contact the IGF secretariat, they would be more than happy, we would be more than happy to help you. Now, that we are over time I would like to remind everyone we are still taking in all inputs. Please send them to the IGF Secretariat so all of your inputs can be captured for the session as well.
I will end with all of our speakers in reverse order this time. So Lillian, the one key take away, 15 seconds each. Please, Lillian.
>> Thank you very much everybody for sharing your experiences, your ideas, I just wanted to conclude with saying that this governance model that we have built all together and that we have all, make our own is not just part of an international system, it's also local.
And this is an invitation to value diversity, experience, learnings and to take advantage of the next year so we can renovate ourselves, be creative, and propose new actions and ask the right questions for the GDC and the BCs.
>> MODERATOR: Charles.
>> CHARLES NOIR: Thanks for a great discussion. This was fabulous. What I am taking away from this is multi‑stakeholderism is a practice. It needs to be practiced regularly. It needs to be strengthened and it needs to be evolved. We all have a role in that and particularly coming from a stakeholder group, if you are, if you do identify in a particular stakeholder group, get in touch. They are diversity stakeholder groups and build a sense of community.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Charles. Amrita.
>> AMRITA CHOUDHURY: I would say engage, build capacity, work together to create common dialogues and to protect what we cherish, the IGF.
>> MODERATOR: Lillian.
>> LILLIAN NALWOGA: I would like to say there is no one size fits all, and we have seen that happening in so many different ways, so we need to continue being innovative, creative, to have meaningful participation whether you are approaching from organising from stakeholder aspect or from an issue perspective, we need to be able to be more creative and innovative.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you Lillian.
>> GIACOMO MAZZONE: Yes, there was a French politician one hundred years ago that was saying the worry is too serious to left it to the generals. I think we need now to decline to the Internet.
The Internet is too serious to be left only to the Governments, and I think only through the richness of the contribution of all stakeholders we can get through. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, and now back to our home region, Chafic Chaya.
>> CHAFIC CHAYA: I will make my closing remarks in English. First, it's really appreciated for all of these NRIs who come from different regions to speak about their challenges and their opportunities and so what they are facing. So on behalf of the Lebanon IGF, I am happy to help these NRIs to establish and start their NRIs because of the experience that we have during our establishment of the Lebanon IGF.
Second, no doubt that the inclusive, open, multistakeholder approach is not an option. It's a foundational, to build first a community with common vision and objectives, that is reflected later in NRI. And third, as we say as technical people, the Internet is the network of networks. So here the global IGF is the network of the NRIs networks and happy to help anyone that can take our experience and tailor it to their experiences at their national and regional level. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. What a perfect way to end the session. I hope it has given you just a small taste of all of the really good work that the more than 174 NRIs across the globe do. Believe engage with your local IGFs in your region in your economy, in your home country.
Can we give us a round of applause all for the work of the IGF and also the NRIs.
(Applause).