Centre for Internet and Society

UIDAI remains silent on #Aadhaarleaks of 13 crore users through government portals

praskrishna — 2017-05-20T11:06:16Z

As the arguments for making Aadhaar mandatory go on, is there any way to stem the leaks and identify who exactly has all this information.

The blog post by Shruti Menon was published by Newslaundry on May 2, 2017

The verdict on linking Aadhaar with Permanent Account Number (PAN) and making it mandatory for filing income tax returns (ITRs) will be out soon. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi had a tough challenge ahead of him in the Supreme Court as the state presented its argument today. Rohatgi defended the amendment in income tax law allowing this after senior lawyer Shyam Divan made a strong case against it on April 26 and 27. Divan became a hero to many overnight after he presented compelling arguments against the amendment citing facets of right to privacy - informational self-determination, personal autonomy, and bodily integrity - as he did so. Though the court has refused to entertain arguments pertaining to privacy, he managed to argue these concerns without couching them under right to privacy laws.

Advocate Gautam Bhatia posted minute-by-minute developments from the courtroom, and soon, #ThankYouMrDivan became one of the top trends on Twitter.

A day before the state presented its arguments, the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) published a report titled “Information, Security Practices of Aadhaar (or lack thereof): A documentation of public availability of Aadhaar numbers with sensitive personal financial information” late on Monday. Authored by Amber Sinha and Srinivas Kodali, the report documents the leaks of over 13 crore Aadhaar numbers and resulting information of beneficiaries through four government portals-two at the centre and two at the state. “We are primarily talking of lack of standards and data fact-checking, storage and how all of this information- account numbers, phone numbers plus, Aadhaar numbers- in public domain increases the nature of risk of the backbone of digital payments,” Kodali told Newslaundry.

The four portals studied by the two are National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP), National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) and two databases of Andhra Pradesh- NREGA and their scheme called Chandranna Bima. The report claims that the aforementioned public portals compromised personally identifiable information (PII) including “Aadhaar numbers and financial details such as bank account numbers” of 13 crore people due to a lack of security controls.

“While the details were masked for public view, someone with login access could get the details,” the report read. “When one of the url query parameters of the website showing the masked personal details was modified from ‘nologin’ to ‘login’, that is, control access to login based pages were allowed providing unmasked details without the need for a password.” What this essentially means is that these portals allow people to explore lists organised by states, districts, area, sub-district, and municipalities which contain the personal information of the people who are enrolled into the schemes.

The report also cites legal framework under the Aadhaar Act that allows the government or private entities to store Aadhaar numbers on the grounds that they won’t be used for purposes other than those listed in the act. CIS’s study, however, reveals that information pertaining to religion, caste, race, tribe or even income is sometimes collected and published on such portals with little in the way of security checks.

Speaking to Newslaundry, Anupam Saraph, professor and former governance and IT advisor to Goa’s Chief Minister, Manohar Parrikar, said that the data exposed could be significantly more than what the report shows. “Many more Aadhaar numbers have been exposed on websites relating to Pension Schemes, PDS, Ministry of Water and Sanitation, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Scholarships, Schools, Colleges, Universities, Kendriya Sainik board, PM Avas Yojana to name a few,” he said. “Besides this Registrars to the UIDAI (State Governments and various ministries of the Central government, some Public Sector undertakings) were allowed to retain the Aadhaar number, demographic and biometric data (associated with the Aadhaar number). While this may not be exposed on websites, it is unsecured and possibly accessible to data brokers within and outside government,” said Saraph who has designed delivery channels and ID schemes for better governance.

What’s worth noting is that the people whose data has been breached are unaware that their information is available on public platforms and vulnerable to data theft. “It is UIDAI’s [Unique Identification Authority of India] job to investigate and inform them,” Kodali told Newslaundry. “At some point of time, everybody is going to have everybody’s information,” he added.

Currently, the government has an open data portal. It describes itself as a platform “intended to be used by Government Ministries/Departments and their organisation to publish datasets, documents, services, tools and applications collected by them for public use”.

So is it feasible to have open data portals for transparency and accountability? “Having certain government data being publicly accessible is certainly desirable.” Saraph continued that the problem was, data on public expenditure should ideally be openly accessible but it’s also where the most leakage occurs. “Making Aadhaar mandatory is meaningless,” he said, as India does not have a policy on open data portals yet, which can subject Aadhaar data to “misuse”.

Given that the UIDAI is responsible for investigating and making people aware of any data breach or theft, they have remained silent for an oddly long time. It is unclear whether the UIDAI is itself aware of who has accessed the data that is insecurely published on these government portals. “They’re letting everybody collect this information but they were not aware themselves that who had access to this information, that’s the main problem,” Kodali said. While the Aadhaar ecosystem was to ensure social inclusion and transparency, in its current form, the system looks so opaque that the people who are running it may not be aware themselves of what is going on.

What does it mean to have access to someone else’s Aadhaar?

With an increasing number of social welfare schemes being linked to Aadhaar, it was touted as an attempt to remove the middlemen, frauds and corruption with the government. According to the report, "A cumulative amount of Rs 1,78,694.75 has been transferred using DBT for 138 schemes under 27 ministries since 2013. Various financial frameworks like Aadhaar Payments Bridge (APB) and Aadhaar Enabled Payment Systems (AePS) have been built by National Payment Corporation of India to support DBT and also to allow individuals use Aadhaar for payments."

Given that such systems are in place to ensure easier and accessible banking, research shows that the Aadhaar seeding process led to government portals putting personal information of so many people under various schemes in the "absence of information security practices to handle so much PII", as per the research. This is not only a breach of privacy but also makes a person vulnerable to financial fraud in cases where their bank details are public. "One of the prime examples is individuals receiving phone calls from someone claiming to be from the bank. Aadhaar data makes this process much easier for fraud and increases the risk around transactions," the report reads.

UIDAI on silent mode

Unfortunately, UIDAI has not addressed this concern, let alone acknowledge it. It has been cracking down on people by filing first information reports (FIRs) against those tracking and exposing the vulnerabilities of the Aadhaar system. Recently, UIDAI’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), ABP Pandey was accused of blocking twitter handles of prominent security researchers and analysts who have been extensively reporting about vulnerabilities in the Aadhaar system.

One of the handles was blocked was Saraph’s. “I do not know why they blocked me. I have been vocal about the problems associated with the UID and its use,” he said. He added that he served several notices of contempt of court to the CEO of UIDAI and has been questioning the verification and audit of UID database. “Perhaps [he] was annoyed with my efforts to make them accountable and responsible,” he said.

On April 18, however, in a response to Right to Information (RTI) query filed by Sushil Kambampati, UIDAI denied having blocked any twitter handles. Almost immediately, it was called out on twitter for ‘lying’ in the RTI response as many users claimed it had.

Saraph declared that such a move, the blocking of users asking questions, was indicative of UIDAI’s cluelessness. Apar Gupta, a Delhi-based lawyer working on cyber security, had told Newslaundry that it was unethical and unconstitutional of government bodies (such as the UIDAI) to block people. He reiterated that in one of his tweets recently.

Today, however, the Pandey’s individual twitter profile no longer exists. It has now been changed to “ceo_office”. CIS’s report states that the UIDAI has been pushing for more databases to get in sync with Aadhaar, but with little or no accountability. “While the UIDAI has been involved in proactively pushing for other databases to get seeded with Aadhaar numbers, they take a little responsibility in ensuring the security and privacy of such data,” the report reads. Kodali, however, told Newslaundry that the report was not aimed at questioning the security of such seeding. “We’re not saying it is not really secure but we’re just saying it increases the risk factors,” he said.

UIDAI has also not responded to several queries filed by vulnerability testers.

Newslaundry reached out to the UIDAI with the following questions:

According to the report published, four government portals have personally identifiable information of about 13 crore people including their Aadhaar numbers and bank account details. What is being done about this?

If a person's privacy has been breached, what are the steps UIDAI would take for redressal?

Is UIDAI investigating the 13 crore Aadhaar leaks?

The report states "When one of the url query parameters of website showing the masked personal details was modified from “nologin” to “login”, that is control access to login based pages were allowed providing unmasked details without the need for a password." Is this true, and if so, what is your statement?

How do you ensure data security on open data portals?

This piece will be updated if and when they respond.

While UIDAI remains silent, A-G Rohatgi argued today that close to 10 lakh PAN cards were found to be fake. "Are they propagating a general public interest or propagating the fraud (fake PANs) which is going in," he said at the court today while suggesting that Aadhaar was the only way of preventing fake or duplicate cards.

Senior advocate Arvind Datar, who is also appearing for one of the three petitioners in the case said that the government could not take away his right to chose whether or nor to have an Aadhaar. "The Supreme Court had directed them that they cannot make it mandatory. The mandate of the Supreme Court can not be undone. My right of not to have an Aadhaar can not be taken away indirectly."

Though there are problems with the Aadhaar system and apparently very little redressal at the citizen’s end, Aadhaar is here to stay. As Divan and Rohatgi argue the constitutionality of making Aadhaar mandatory at the Supreme Court, the pertinent question that only the UIDAI can answer is whether they are technologically capable of keeping data secure given how aggressively Aadhaar linkage is being promoted.

However, Rohatgi's argument in court today, according to a Business Standard report was that the government cannot destroy the Aadhaar cards of people even after their death. Instead of being reassuring, this only seems to increase the possibilities for identity theft, as if there is little in the way of redressal mechanisms in life, what choices do the dead have?

The author can be contacted on Twitter @shrutimenon10.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/newslaundry-shruti-menon-may-2-2017-uidai-remains-silent-on-aadhaar-leaks-of-users-through-govt-portals

UIDAI Practices and the Information Technology Act, Section 43A and Subsequent Rules

elonnai — 2014-03-06T07:00:21Z

UIDAI practices and section 43A of the IT Act are analyzed in this post.

In the 52^nd Report on Cyber Crime, Cyber Security, and the Right to Privacy – in evidence provided, the Department of Electronics and Information Technology stated “...Section 43A and the rules published under that Section cover the entire privacy in case of digital data. These are being followed by UIDAI also and other organisations...” (pg.46) [1]

This blog post explains the requirements found under Section 43A of the Information Technology Act 2000 and the subsequent Information Technology “ Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules 2011[2] and analyses publicly available documents from the UIDAI website[3] as well as the UIDAI enrolment form[4] to demonstrate the ways in which:

UIDAI practices are in line with section 43A and the Rules,
UIDAI practices are not in line with section 43A and the Rules,
UIDAI practices are partially in with section 43A and the Rules
Where more information is needed to draw a conclusion.

Applicability and Scope

Section 43A of the Information Technology Act 2008 and subsequent Rules apply only to Body Corporate and to digital information.

Body Corporate under the Information Technology Act 2008 is defined as:

“Any company and includes a firm, sole proprietorship or other association of individuals engaged in commercial or professional activities”

UIDAI Practices - not in line: The UIDAI is not a body corporate. The UIDAI is an attached office under the aegis of the Planning Commission that was set up by an executive order.[5]

The UIDAI collects, processes, stores, and shares both digital and non-digital information. As section 43A and subsequent Rules apply only to digital information, there is not sufficient protection provided over all the information collected, processed, stored, and used by the UIDAI.

Privacy Policy on Website

Rule 4 requires body corporate to provide a privacy policy on their website. The privacy policy must include:

Clear and easily accessible statements of its practices and policies
Type of personal or sensitive personal data or information collected
Purpose of collection and usage of such information
Disclosure of information including sensitive personal information
Reasonable security practices and procedures as provided under rule 8

UIDAI Practices - Partially in Line

Though the UIDAI has placed a privacy policy[6] on their website, the privacy policy only addresses the use of website and does not comprehensively provide clear and accessible statements about all of the UIDAI’s practices and policies.
The UIDAI privacy policy does not state the specific types of personal or sensitive data that could be collected, but instead states “As a general rule, this website does not collect Personal Information about you when you visit the site. You can generally visit the site without revealing Personal Information, unless you choose to provide such information.”

Features on the UIDAI website that require individuals to provide personal information and sensitive personal information include: Booking an appointment, checking aadhaar status, enrolling for e-aadhaar, enrolling for aadhaar, updating aadhaar data. Types of information required for these services include: mobile number, name, address, gender, date of birth, and enrolment ID.[7]

The privacy policy goes on to state: “If you are asked for any other Personal Information you will be informed how it will be used if you choose to give it. If at any time you believe the principles referred to in this privacy statement have not been followed, or have any other comments on these principles, please notify the webmaster through the Contact Us page. Note: The use of the term "Personal Information" in this privacy statement refers to any information from which your identity is apparent or can be reasonably ascertained.”
The UIDAI privacy policy does explain the purpose for collection of information on the website and the use of collected information.
The UIDAI privacy policy does not address the possibility of disclosure of information collected by the UIDAI from the use of its website, except in the case of when an individual provides his/her email at which point the privacy policy states “Your e-mail address will not be used for any other purpose, and will not be disclosed without your consent.”
The UIDAI privacy policy does not provide information about the security practices adopted by the UIDAI.

Consent

Rule 5 requires that prior to the collection of sensitive personal data, the body corporate must obtain consent, either in writing or through fax regarding the purpose of usage before collection of such information.

UIDAI Practices - in Line
The UIDAI collects written consent from individuals through the enrolment form for the issuance of an Aadhaar number.

Collection Limitation

Rule 5 (2) requires that body corporate only collect sensitive personal data if it is connected to a lawful purpose and if it is considered necessary for that purpose.

UIDAI Practices - in Line
The Aadhaar enrolment form requires only the necessary sensitive personal data for the issuance of an Aadhaar number. Individuals are given the option to provide banking and financial information.

Notice During Direct Collection

Rule 5(3) requires that while collecting information directly from an individual the body corporate must provide the following information:

The fact that the information is being collected
The purpose for which the information is being collected
The intended recipients of the information
The name and address of the agency that is collecting the information
The name and address of the agency that will retain the information

UIDAI Practices - Partially in Line
The Aadhaar enrolment form does not provide the following information:

The intended recipients of the information
The name and address of the agency collecting the information
The name and address of the agency that will retain the information

Retention Limitation

Rule 5(4) requires that body corporate must retain sensitive personal data only for as long as it takes to fulfil the stated purpose or otherwise required under law.

UIDAI Practices - Unclear
It is unclear from publicly available information what the UIDAI retention practices are.

Use Limitation

Rule 5(5) requires that information must be used for the purpose that it was collected for.

UIDAI Practices - Unclear
It is unclear from publicly available information if the UIDAI is using collected information only for the purpose for which it was collected for.

Right to Access and Correct

Rule 5(6) requires body corporate to provide individuals with the ability to review the information they have provided and access and correct personal or sensitive personal information.

UIDAI Practices - Partially in Line
Though the UIDAI provides individuals with the ability to access and correct personal information, as stated on the enrolment form, correction is free only if changed within 96 hours of enrolment. Additionally, as stated on the enrolment form, if an individual chooses to allow for the UIDAI to facilitate the opening of a bank account and link present bank accounts to the UID number, this information, after being provided, cannot be corrected. The UIDAI website has a portal for updating information, but only name, address, gender, data of birth, and mobile number can be updated through this method. [9]

Right to ‘Opt Out’ and Withdraw Consent

Rule 5(7) requires that body corporate must provide individuals with the option of 'opting out' of providing data or information sought. Individuals also have the right to withdraw consent at any point of time. Body corporate has the right to withdraw services if consent is withdrawn.

UIDAI Practices - Partially in Line
The UID enrolment form provides individuals with one ‘optional’ field - the option of having the UIDAI open a bank account and link it to the individuals UID number or having the UIDAI link present bank accounts to individuals UID number. No other option to ‘opt out’ or withdraw consent is present on the enrolment form or the UIDAI privacy policy, terms of use, or website.

Security of Information

Rule 8 requires that body corporate must secure information in accordance with the ISO 27001 standard. These practices must be audited on an annual basis or when the body corporate undertakes a significant up gradation of its process and computer resource.

UIDAI Practices - Unclear
The security practices adopted by the UIDAI are not mentioned in the website privacy policy, on the website, or on the enrolment form, thus it is unclear from publicly available information if the UID is compliant with ISO 27001 standards. Though the UIDAI has been functioning since 2010, and it is unclear from publicly available information if annual audits of the UIDAI security practices have been undertaken.

Disclosure with Consent

Rule 6 requires that body corporate must have consent before disclosing sensitive personal data to any third person or party, except in the case with Government agencies for the purpose of verification of identity, prevention, detection, investigation, including cyber incidents and prosecution and punishment of offenses, on receipt of a written request.

UIDAI Practices - Partially in Line
In the enrolment form, consent for disclosure is stated as ‘‘I have no objection to the UIDAI sharing information provided by me to the UIDAI with agencies engaged in delivery of welfare services.” This is a blanket statement and allows for all future possibilities of sharing and disclosure of information provided with any organization that the UIDAI deems as ‘engaged in the delivery of welfare services’.

The UIDAI privacy policy only addresses the disclosure of an individual’s email address with consent. Though not directly addressing disclosure, the UIDAI privacy policy also states “ We will not identify users or their browsing activities, except when a law enforcement agency may exercise a warrant to inspect the service provider's logs.”

Prohibition on Publishing and Further Disclosure

Rule 6(3) and 6(4) prohibit the body corporate from publishing sensitive personal data or information. Similarly, organizations receiving sensitive personal data are not allowed to disclose it further.

UIDAI Practices - in Line
The UDAI does not publish sensitive personal data. It is unclear what practices and standards registrars and enrolment agencies are functioning under.

Requirements for Transfer of Sensitive Personal Data

Rule 7 requires that body corporate may transfer sensitive personal data into another jurisdiction only if the country ensures the same level of protection.

UIDAI Practices - Unclear
It is unclear from publicly available information if information collected by the UIDAI is transferred outside of India.

Establishment of Grievance Officer

Rule 5(9) requires that body corporate must establish a grievance officer and the details must be posted on the body corporates website and grievances must be addressed within a month of receipt.

UIDAI Practices - in Line
The website of the UIDAI provides details of a grievance officer that individuals can contact.[10] It is unclear from publicly available information if grievances are addressed within a month.

[1]. http://164.100.47.134/lsscommittee/Information%20Technology/15_Information_Technology_52.pdf

[2]. http://dispur.nic.in/itact/it-procedures-sensitive-personal-data-rules-2011.pdf

[3]. http://uidai.gov.in/

[4]. http://www.jharkhand.gov.in/marpdf/Aadhar-enrolmentform.pdf

[5]. http://uidai.gov.in/organization-details.html

[6]. http://uidai.gov.in/privacy-policy.html

[7]. http://resident.uidai.net.in/home

[8]. http://www.jharkhand.gov.in/marpdf/Aadhar-enrolmentform.pdf

[9]. https://ssup.uidai.gov.in/web/guest/ssup-home

[10]. http://uidai.gov.in/contactus.html

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/uid-practices-and-it-act-sec-43-a-and-subsequent-rules

UID: The World’s Largest Biometric Database

praskrishna — 2011-07-23T02:04:45Z

At the start of his presentation, Sunil Abraham pointed to two aerial drawings of cybercafes: one where each computer was part of a private booth, and one where the computers were in the open so the screens would be visible to any one. Which layout would be more friendly to women, and why, Abraham wanted to know. Some participants selected the first option, liking the idea of the privacy, while others liked the second option so that the cybercafe owner would be able to monitor users’ activities.

Abraham said he was surprised no one said option one looked like masturbation booths, adding that in May, India passed rules prohibiting the first design option to avoid just such an issue. This is despite a survey conducted of female college students, who liked the idea of privacy in cybercafés that typically are male-dominated.

Cybercafes are just one of the areas impacted by India’s plan for collecting and using biometrics to create unique individual identification cards.

Abraham focused his presentation on activists’ efforts to counter the government’s myths about a unique identification (UID) program.

One campaign image showed two soldiers on the border asking for an east-Asian looking person’s identification. The way to balance, or rectify, the drawing, Abraham said, would be to allow citizens to be able to ask the soldiers for the identification information.

The campaign, “Rethink UID Project,” included several images illustrating various problems with the plan. For example, one said: “Central storage of keys is a bad idea, so is central storage of our biometrics.” As Abraham explained, if storing a copy of your housekey at the police station does not make us feel more secure, then why wouldn’t storing our biometrics with the government also make us a little more scared?

In the Indian scheme, Abraham said, the government says biometrics will be used as an authentication factor in order to prove your identity, but from a computer science perspective, it’s a bad idea because it is so easy to steal biometrics. And, as Abraham pointed out, if your biometrics are stolen, it’s not possible for you to re-secure it—it’s not like getting a new ATM card and password, he said.

If this system of national UID was designed using digital keys instead of biometrics, then we would have a completely different configuration, Abraham said.

Centralized storage is nonnegotiable, and therefore the process of authentification is done through a centralized database, but with digital keys or digital signatures, authentification could be done on a peer basis, so citizen could authenticate border guards and vice versa.

Another image from the “Rethink UID Project” campaign pointed out that “Technology cannot solve corruption.” As Abraham said, problems of corruption in the subsidy system (food, loans, education, employment guarantee act in rural India, etc) won’t be fixed with biometrics. For example, if biometric equipment is installed at fair-price shops, before the shop owner gives the grain, the citizen would have to present biometrics, which would go through a centralized server and be authenticated, then the citizen would get the grain, and ultimately there would be a record saying this particular citizen collected this amount of subsidized grain at this particular time.

But there are a whole range of ways shop owners can compromise the system, Abraham said.

The first way: 30-50 percent of India is illiterate, so shop owner can say the biometrics were rejected by the server and the citizen would not know better. Or, the owner can say there was no connectivity so authentification didn’t go through, or the owner could say there was no electricity so the system won’t work, or the shop owner could give just part of the grain that the citizen is due.

Corruption innovates and terrorism innovates—if technology innovates, so does corruption, as it is not a static phenomenon, Abraham said. You can’t wish away human beings from technological configurations.

One village will have multiple biometric readers.

Abraham said they have proposed an alternative schema: remove readers from the shop, school, hospital, bank, etc., and have only one scanner at the local governance hall. Instead of the citizen becoming transparent to the government, the government should become transparent to the citizen. The shop owners should make transparent which IDs they have given how much grain to, and only if they are going to dispute the ID of a citizen, can they go to the local government administrative office to prove the ID.

Another image from the “Rethink UID Project” campaign said, “The poor and the rich: who do we track first?”

Abraham explained that one problem in India is “black money,” or money for which you don’t pay taxes because the accounts are in fake names in order to store money. Like creating fake bank accounts, he said it also would be easy to create fake biometrics by combining the handprints and eyes of multiple people to get a second fake ID. Also the system could be hacked into and iris images Photoshopped. Ghost ideas also could be created and then sold off. Because the rich will get their IDs behind closed doors, Abraham said, it will be easy for them to get multiple IDs, but the poor will not be able to.

Referring to “tailgating,” or when one ID is card swiped to gain entrance for multiple people, such as swiping one metro card and then two people walking through, Abraham noted that the problem is that the tailgating only is seen as a problem when it’s at the bottom of the pyramid, such as one woman goes to the fair-price shop to collect grain for five or six families so only one person has to lose a day’s wage instead of all five or six losing a day’s wages. Tailgating at the bottom if the pyramid is usually a question of survival, he said.

Thus, another image from the campaign showed a pyramid and said, “Transparency at the top first…before transparency at the bottom.”

The first principle is that expectations of privacy should be inversely proportional to power, so people who are really powerful, like NGOs, politicians, or heads of corporations, should have less privacy, and people who have very little power should have more privacy, Abraham said.

Also, from a business perspective, the nation gets greater return on its investment if surveillance equipment is trained on people at the top of the pyramid to catch big-time corruption, he said.

Most of the panic around the UID is over the transaction database. Beyond a databse storing everyone’s biometrics, another database will track transactions: every time you buy a mobile phone or purchase a ticket or access a cyber cafe or subsidies, thanks to UID, there will a record made in the transaction database, Abraham said.

Abraham said it is important to note that surveillance is not an intrinsic part of information systems, but once surveillance is engineered into information systems, both those with good intentions or bad intentions can take advantage of that surveillance capability.

The UID means there will be 22 databases available to 12 intelligence agencies, he said.

So when a girl enters into a cybercafé, first she will have to provide her UID, and then the café owner will photocopy the card, then the owner has the right to take a photo of the girl using his own camera, then the owner is supposed to maintain browser logs of her computer for a period of one year.

So the question then is how to assure accountability without surveillance?

The first possibility, Abraham said, is partial storage. The transaction database could store half the data, and the central database could store the other half, so the full 360-view of the data would not be available without a court order.

The second solution is a transaction escrow, where every time a record is put into the main database, it will be encrypted using 2-3 keys, and only if 3 agencies cooperate with keys, can the information be decrypted. Thus, it is targeted surveillance, not blanket surveillance.

To conclude his presentation, Abraham divided participants into four groups in order to design surveillance systems for internet surveillance, mobile technologies, CCTVs, and border control.

Sharon Strover spoke on behalf of the CCTV group, saying they ended up with more questions than anything else. They agreed there should be notices when cameras are in use, there should be public knowledge of who is doing surveillance and who has access to the footage, and the data shouldn’t be sold. But the group couldn’t decide which spaces warranted CCTVs and which not.

Abraham then pointed out that the next generation of CCTVs can read everybody’s irises as they pass the cameras—it’s in the lab now, and 2-3 years from the market, he said.

Next, Andy Carvin spoke on behalf of the mobile technologies surveillance group. Whether or not capturing metadata or content as well, the mobile phone company can collect it, but it shouldn’t be able to keep any identifiable information for the person – it should only be able to look at information in the aggregate. The rest of the information should be shipped to a non-governmental organization or government agency specialized in privacy, and 2 keys would be required: one from the judiciary and one from the NGO or governmental agency.

Smári McCarthy reported back for the Internet surveillance group, pointing out that data retention has been useful in criminal cases less than 0.2 percent of the time in one study, and another showed there has been no statistically significant increase in the number of criminal cases solved because of data retention. So, he said, the group concluded there should be no blanket surveillance, only court orders in certain criminal cases that define who will be under surveillance and for how long. Also, they wanted to see a transparency register available so the public could be informed about how many people are under surveillance currently and throughout year and other general information, such as the success rate—how many of these surveillances have led to criminal convictions or similar.

Finally, Summer Harlow spoke on behalf of the border control group, which said scanning of checked- and carry-on luggage is acceptable, but there should be no luggage searches without specific probable cause from intelligence agencies or if the scans pick up weapons or other contraband. Similarly, people could be subject to spectrum scans and drug/bomb sniffing dogs for weapons and contraband, but again they would not be physically searched by border agents without probable cause. Also, people and luggage could not randomly be searched based on the country of their passport or their flight destination or origin.

In summary, Abraham said, surveillance is like salt in food: it is essential in small amounts, but completely counter-productive if even slightly excessive.

Download Sunil's presentation here [PDF, 1389 kb]
Sunil Abraham made the presentation at the Gary Chapman International School on Digital Transformation on 21 July 2011. The original news published by International School on Digital Transformation can be read here
Read the schedule here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/uid-worlds-largest-database

UID Project in India - Some Possible Ramifications

Liliyan — 2012-03-21T10:13:27Z

Having a standard for decentralized ID verification rather than a centralized database that would more often than not be misused by various authorities will solve ID problems, writes Liliyan in this blog entry. These blog posts to be published in a series will voice the expert opinions of researchers and critics on the UID project and present its unique shortcomings to the reader.

Researchers at CIS have been grappling with the UID project from research, advocacy, and legal standpoints though all approach it from their own perspective and opinions are rarely duplicated. In an attempt to make their expert opinions more accessible to readers, a series of blog posts, this being the first, will be put up. These posts will not, and cannot because of its length and format, try to address all the possible issues the UID poses. However, they will present the bare bones of the arguments and research questions that the independent voices at CIS see as crucial. These posts will also ask many more questions than they answer, in an attempt to spur further dialogue about the UID project.

Central to understanding the nature of the UID project and its possible ramifications is the idea that technology is not merely a tool to be used by an unchanging, monolithic state. In fact, its very adoption can create ripple effects throughout the apparatus of the state. When the state adoptsa mainstream and ubiquitous technology, the structure of the government and methods of governance change. These changes are not always so dramatic as to be immediately noticeable without some informed inspection, but if one considers the way the state and the citizen interact the significance of these changes becomes starkly apparent. Can we trust the government to use touch screen voting machines like the ones we see every day at the bank? Do government surveillance cameras make us safer or introduce worrisome intrusion into our privacy, or both? Technology is not as neutral as it appears. That is not to say that it is inherently good or bad, but that it is not inert, it is transformative in nature.

The nation state as we know it is built on the printed word, or at least analogue technology. The ways in which we codify, distribute, and assimilate information have, for centuries, been dominated by the printing press. With the introduction of “database governance” there will inevitably be a shift, and a radical one at that. The Indian government has announced its intention to move towards “SMART” (simple, moral, accountable, responsive and transparent) governance, and this implies both an acceptance of the neo-liberal philosophy of government and techno-governance. To achieve a new level of transparency, accountability, and responsiveness, the move towards e-governance could be a major turning point, but how does this shift complicate and change the citizen-state relationship in India? How does this change shift the relationship of India with the rest of the international community?

The UID and Shifts in the Citizen-State Relationship

One way that the citizen-state relationship will change with the shift towards techno-governance, specifically in regard to the UID project, is that the UID posits the state as both the safe-keeper and arbiter of identity. Proponents of the UID project are adamant that it is a voluntary program, but even the UID website states that “in time, certain service providers may require a person to have a UID to deliver services”. As the UID becomes increasingly ubiquitous, could not having a number mean being cut off from some or many of the basic privileges of citizenship if one's identity is becoming more difficult to verify? If having a UID number is the most prominent marker of identity, then it is through state definition, arbitration and upon the state's technical capacity that all will rely.

Moreover, how do we begin to address the privacy issues raised by technological advances in relation to non-changing legal structures? What does it mean to capture all this identity data without introducing a new privacy legislation to protect the citizen? Without new legal accommodation, otherwise benign processes like a statistical census can become a potent tool in a shift towards a police state. As state apparatus's shift, there must be some paradigmatic shift in law to accompany these new technologies and government roles.

If the state transforms through the integration of e-governance forms, then there will inevitably be a recalibration of the relationship between the state, the market, and the citizen. Traditionally the separation of these entities creates arbitration and within a development paradigm there is dynamic, active triangulation. One way we can see this triangulation is through government intervention in markets on behalf of the citizen. There are certain spaces of consumption, for example, such as a cinema where state intervention against discrimination creates a marker for citizenship. That is, because I am able to access a cinema without discrimination, as one of my constitutional rights, this demonstrates my citizenship. However, with the introduction of public- private partnerships, or PPPs, the fact of having multiple stake-holders of political economy allows for the state to disinvest in the production and delivery of certain public services. Satisfying the needs of the citizen for services like sanitation, public education, delivery of power and clean water, maintenance of infrastructure like roads and bridges, can be handed over to corporate entities. The Indian government has enthusiastically embraced PPPs as a way to bring needed capital to the infrastructure demands that accompany their economic growth goals. However, how does this kind of task delegation affect transparency and accountability? If the state decides to stop producing or supplying a good or service, and instead turns this over to a corporation, can the mechanisms for state oversight realistically be trusted to make sure quality and accountability are not adversely affected and rectify the situation if they are? Where does the citizen come into all of this, in terms of what they stand to gain and lose?

The Definition of Citizenship and the UID

As the state and the market enters into new relationships the definition of citizenship changes. If the citizen is seen as the intended beneficiary of state programs, this new relationship between state and market begs the question “Who is subject to (or the subject of) the state?” When the corporate sphere creates micro-financing that helps farmers, they may help the people at the bottom of the economic pyramid manage their debt, but does it necessarily address the problems that created the debt in the first place? How does the market mediate the citizen-state dialogue? As the state and the market enter into new relationships there is a recalibration of the citizen-government relationship. Do market demands for an e-literate consumer put pressure on the state to create one where one did not exist before, and if so, can this not have profound implications for the definition of citizenship?

Part of the movement towards e-governance is signalled by the fact that there has been a shift away from state-sponsored literacy campaigns to e-literacy programs. Does this use of information and communications technology for development (or ITC4D) alienate significant portions of the population? Can such programs in fact widen the digital divide? With the introduction of e-governance the state asks the citizen to participate in governance by creating new avenues for civic participation, such as providing databases of information pertaining to the state that is freely accessible for analysis and manipulation by anyone with the skills to do so. But, if this makes it impossible for some portions of the citizenry to communicate effectively with the state, does this run the risk of making certain, traditional forms of citizenship redundant? How are people with low literacy and little or no access to the necessary technologies supposed to communicate with this new high-tech bureaucracy? Will those who cannot navigate the new systems be inadvertently relegated to second-class status?

This is of particular concern when thinking about the UID project. To properly manage and distribute social services, ID management in some form is crucial. However, when trying to make sure services are properly delivered to the uneducated poor the danger for digital-analogue slippage that is not in their favour increases, and accountability is not necessarily adequately addressed. For example, if I am an illiterate farmer entitled to a certain ration and the person conducting the transaction decides to defraud me, they can easily ask me to authenticate my biometrics, make it appear that they have been simply checking my identity when they have actually fooled me into authenticating the “completed” transaction and simply tell me the computer says, I've already received my share, that I'm only entitled to half of the normal amount, or some other such lie. In this scenario, how would I know this person wasn't telling me the truth? If they lie using a simple ledger, I can take the ledger itself or a copy of it to a literate friend and have them help me navigate the situation. I can seek redress and substantiate my claims more easily if I am not alienated by the technologies being used. Technologies can be empowering or dis-empowering depending on their application. How then, do we balance the demands of the market and the duties of the state against the rights of the citizen? Or rather, how do we apply technology in such a way that the demands of the market and the duties of the state mutually balance each other?

Centralization and Cost-effectiveness of the UID

While ID management is indisputably important, it does not require a centralized database. In the US there are multiple pieces of information, stored in separate databases that can be used to authenticate a transaction. No one can open a bank account with just a social security insurance number. You also need a separate form of ID, often two, that can be used to verify identity. In this way, the SSI number is a bit like a “username” and the other forms of ID, driver's license or passport, function like a corresponding “password”. With the UID project, however, the “username” (the number itself) and the “password” (the number holder's biometrics) are stored in the same place. Thereby, should the database be in some way compromised, all the information needed to verify and complete transactions would be available. If storing this information in a central database is really a good idea, then one must also accept the premise that merging all existing email servers into one monolithic server is also a good idea. Furthermore, centralization is not only more dangerous, it is totally unnecessary. Trillions of dollars worth of trade take place every year using PIN numbers issued by banks and verified without the verifying data being centralized. Having a standard for decentralized ID verification, rather than a centralized database would solve ID problems without creating a database that would be vulnerable to attack.

There are lots of examples of governments implementing costly safety measures that don't actually make anyone safer. Take for example the cameras put up all over London to monitor the movements of people. Unfortunately, something as low-tech as a hooded sweatshirt can thwart these attempts at surveillance. Moreover, if I am a criminal, I am going to make it a priority to know where the cameras are so that I can strategically avoid them. Another example is the millions of dollar the U.S. government spent on putting an armed Federal Air Marshal on every flight, post 9/11. While traditional intelligence gather has thwarted other attempted attacks since 9/11, Air Marshals have not been responsible for stopping any. Simply because the UID project is more technologically advanced does not make it more effective. It seems to greatly increase the risk of fraud that there can be so many separate biometrics machines scattered in different places to verify so many transactions. Having the machines sequestered in private businesses where they will not be constantly monitored or regulated seems to be both costly and easily subject to tampering. It seems to make more sense to have, say, one central, monitored machine per so many people that could be used to settle identity disputes when they arise rather than making the technology a part of every transaction.

Infallibility and Circumvention of the UID

The UID is not infallible and circumvention will certainly be a problem with the project. We find an analogy in the field of digital rights management. If I copy an mp3 without permission or payment, that is illegal. Digital rights management law was introduced to stop this practice, but it was circumvented. This legislation has not stopped the first crime. It has merely created a second, that of circumventing the law. The UID, in so far as it may be used to try to stop the crime of illegally siphoning resources such as, for example, grain intended to go to the poor, cannot stop people from circumventing the system. Circumventing the UID will be a crime. If doing so were truly impossible there would be no need to criminalize it. So, instead of preventing the initial crime of siphoning may not prevent the first crime, while introducing another.

There are basically two possible types of circumvention that are possible, though they might present themselves in various different forms. “Type A” or “the Mission Impossible” kind of fraud might involve fake thumb prints and contact lenses being worn by someone trying to fool the person conducting the biometric authentication. “Type B” occurs when the person operating the biometrics machine is working to defraud the system, most likely with one or many accomplices.

“Type A” involves one dishonest person, who is trying to access someone else's account or a ghost account, and there are various proposed methods to prevent against this type of fraud. To prevent against people using fake thumb prints, the biometrics machines will measure the heat of the thumb as well as the image of the thumb. With the iris scan, there will be a pulse of light to cause contraction in the iris so that a contact lens, which cannot adjust for light, can be detected. All of this will drastically raise the price of the machines in question. It is hard to imagine farmers and labourers defrauding the system with elaborate biometric defrauding devices, so these expensive machines are much more appropriate for monitoring the top of the economic pyramid, who steal in larger sums and have more sophisticated technology at their disposal.

“Type B” involves dishonesty either by the person in control of the biometric authentication, or both that person and others. This seems to be a much more likely and problematic scenario. Right now, bank accounts that are not connected to a name are regularly created so that people can cheat the tax man. Since the bank profits from these accounts, it's in the bank's interest to help people set up such accounts. Ghost ID numbers, and things like bank accounts that are connected to them, can still be produced with biometrics. How is this possible? Well, to make it possible for so many biometric authentications to happen every day, the whole set of ten finger prints won't be sent. That would be way too much data. So, instead of overwhelming the channels, only one thumb print will be sent. Even that many thumb prints would be an information overload, so each thumb print's image will be reduced to a set of 30 data points that will be compared against the original scans. So, where is there a possibility for fraud? When the scan of the finger is taken, and image is rendered. If someone wants to create a ghost ID they only have to manipulate this image, like with a Photoshop filter, and alter the data points. Once I've created a set of biometric markers that doesn't connect to anyone, I can conduct transactions for a ghost. One can easily imagine a market emerging for ghost IDs. People might start trying to pay foreign tourists for their biometric information, which could be sold to a local office. There are certain settings where biometrics works well, for example, at an airport. There, everything is under constant video surveillance. If someone were to tamper with or try to replace the machinery it would be quickly noticed by the cameras. Even if it weren't, different people would routinely be operating the same machine and this would be an added safe guard against fraud. However, at a bank, or any place where the machines used for verification are operated behind closed doors it is quite likely that the technology will be abused. This abuse could easily go unnoticed, because the draft UID bill has proposed strict accountability measures for the Authority, and has conveniently overlooked extending these to collecting and enrolling agencies.

Digital/Analogue Slippage

There is always the possibility of digital/analogue slippage or, more simply put, the computer records not reflecting what actually happened even if no fake identity was used. This happens all the time in IT buildings in the form of tailgating. Four people go out to lunch together and as they re-enter the building they're supposed to each swipe their ID card individually. It is easier and faster for one person to swipe for everyone so, despite signs discouraging this behaviour, this is a common occurrence. If you were to try to analyse the data collected after a day of such comings and goings it would be indecipherable.

I can also authenticate my biometrics, in order to authorize a transaction, without the transaction actually being complete. Let's say I'm a poor farmer entitled to a ration of 10 kilos of grain. The person who is supposed to give me the grain is not an honest person and insists that I authenticate the transaction before he or she gives me my ration. I do what I'm told but only receive 5 kilos. The computer record shows that I have gotten my full ration, so I have no grounds to contest. In this scenario, more complex technology does not necessarily mean greater accountability. Furthermore, even if I am illiterate, if there is a simple ledger that has recorded the transaction, I can physically take the ledger or a copy of it and show it to some literate person willing to help me. If the only record of the transaction is in a database that I can't access or can't understand it will be even more difficult for me to seek help. Moreover, if I don't understand the technology and the shop owner decides not to give me the grain at all they can simply say “Oh, I'm sorry, your account has been denied” or “The computer says you've already been given your ration” and I have little chance of successfully negotiating that situation. Built in to this example is the disadvantage that the illiterate and the computer illiterate face when dealing with this technology but, this is not necessarily always present in cases where digital/analogue slippage causes confusion or complication.

Commonly, things are bought by or registered to one person and used by another. For example, in a small office building, all the phone lines and computers may have been bought in the name of one person. Each office worker will not buy their own computer or equipment, but instead the computers will be bought in the name of the person who runs the organization or an administrator with financial authority. If someone in the office uses their computer to make a bomb or store child pornography, who is accountable? This is the problem when there is digital/analogue slippage. There is the digital record of events and then things as they really are, which are not always identical, and there is no accountability or safeguard against mistake. In the context of the UID, the possibility of such slippage is too high, and will work against the goal of delivering benefits to the poor instead of facilitating it.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/uid-in-india

Typing in Indic Languages from Mobiles made Easy!

subha — 2013-07-17T09:02:46Z

A new app is up for typing in Indic languages from mobile phones. This is is available online at: http://bitly.com/indictyping and supports on iOS. Android version is to be released soon.

"There are two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors."
Phil Karlton

Yuvi Panda smiles saying this. Yuvi Panda, a former Wikimedia Foundation contractor and developer was here in our Delhi office and I had an opportunity to spend some time discussing some of the technical problems that we have been facing.

One of the major setback most people have with their phones is the lack of language support and lack of typing support for Indic languages. Fortunately most of the new generation phones support Indic languages. Three of the major operating systems used currently by most phones are Android, Windows, Blackberry and iOS. Android being an open source operating system has extensive community support and developments which is something we were primarily hopeful while starting this project. Windows phones also have a good number of user base in India and support for Indic languages on Windows is really good. Though iOS has good support for Indic display there is no support for typing. IOS, Windows and Blackberry all being proprietary have really less community support and any tool available on these app market would be proprietary. So, our idea was to start a cross platform app which will use the available jQuery ime used for Indic typing for Indic Wikipedias and sister projects.

Currently, most of the Indic language Wikipedias use a typing tool called Narayam ( "Narayam" is a Malayalam word which refers to a metal stylus that was used for writing on palm leaves and papyrus in ancient days). By default the typing scheme for most of the language wikipedias is set to transliteration or phonetic. An Indian mobile user would normally type his own language using Roman letters from a mobile. "और दोस्त सब ठीक है?" in Hindi would be typed as "Aur dost sab thik hai?" when someone pings a friend on facebook or sends a text message. Now with the new typing tool you need to type "aur dosta saba thiika hai?" to get the same text in Devanagari script. This typing scheme is almost same like the phonetic typing most people use for regional languages on mobile which is why typing won’t be much of difference. In terms of usability most people would use the typed text either for web search in regional languages, Facebook posts, tweeting or even sending mails and text messages.

The detailed procedure for typing using this tool is documented at: http://goo.gl/HdVJW. Indic typing tool is available at: http://bitly.com/indictyping

Scan the QR code below using your QR code application to go "Indic typing tool".

Developer speaks:

This is a simple tool that lets you type in your native language on mobile phones. Currently only iOS devices are supported.

The tool is a simple wrapper around Wikimedia Foundation Language Engineering's jquery.ime project. It simply adds a much easier to use (on a mobile device) language selector, and makes it available offline (on iOS devices).

Quick links:

Source code: https://github.com/yuvipanda/indic-typing-tool
Test the app and report the bugs directly on GitHub or on Meta.
Credits: YuviPanda, Subhashish Panigrahi, Santhosh Thottingal

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/typing-in-indic-languages-from-mobiles

Tunis Agenda for the Information Society

praskrishna — 2012-09-17T09:39:46Z

The Tunis Agenda dated November 18, 2005.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/tunis-agenda-for-the-information-society

TTT 2015

hasan — 2015-12-15T07:36:25Z

The Centre for Internet & Society's Access to Knowledge team (CIS-A2K) conducted a four day training workshop for Wikimedians all over India in order to facilitate conducting and organising outreach activities for promotion of Wikimedia activities within Indian language communities. Wikimedians from 21 language communities had participated in this training workshop including Wikipedians working for Nepali and Maithili Wikipedia.

CIS-A2K was successful in providing an idea exchange platform during the TTT workshop. Wikipedians from all over India got a chance to discuss their respective Wikimedia projects and identify best practices that could be customised for their own Wikimedia projects.

CIS-A2K conducted TTT 2015 with a clear objecive of training Indian Wikimedians in conducting effective outreach activites, As a reflective exercise on the efficacy of our TTT camp held in Bangalore during February, 2015 we are now conducting follow-up with the participants and I have contacted three Wikipedians (for the month of November 2015) and following are the updates:

Sailesh Patnaik (Odia Wikimedian):

Activities till now:

Attended Google I/O Bhubaneswar to deliver a talk about Wikipedia movement.
Has organized a workshop at KIST Bhubaneswar with 50+ participants.
Was invited by GDG Bhubaneswar group to deliver a talk about Wikipedia project during Google Dev Fest.
Presented a seminar at CET Bhubaneswar after the invitation from the organizing committee of the Perception (The Annual tech fest of CET , Bhubaneswar).

Upcoming Activities

Planning to organize a Wiki Takes Bhubaneswar photowalk and am also planning a GLAM project with a Cooperative society powered by Central Government and spread Open Source movement in Odisha.

V.T. Narayanan and Sayant Mahato (Samskritam Wikipedians):

Activities till now:

In May 2015, Samskrita Bharati organized a camp in Kalladka.
In July 2015 : Rashtriya Sanskrit Samsthan, Sringeri (Now Sringa Giri) organized a symposium for their staff and students.
In August 2015, Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidya Peeta, Tirupathi organized introductory classes on Wikipedia. Sayant Mahato attended the programme and expained in detail about Sanskrit Wikipedia.
Later in August 2015, at Aksharam, Bangalore, Samskrita Bharati conducted a " Medha Shibiram" exclusively oriented to youngsters and students who are based outside India like in USA. The Shibiram was well received both by the students and their parents. The participants were very interested to know about Sanskrit Wikipedia.
Samskrita Bharati is engaged in the work of editing the existing articles in Wikipedia.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/ttt-2015

Transparency in Surveillance

vipul — 2016-01-23T15:11:18Z

Transparency is an essential need for any democracy to function effectively. It may not be the only requirement for the effective functioning of a democracy, but it is one of the most important principles which need to be adhered to in a democratic state.

Introduction

A democracy involves the state machinery being accountable to the citizens that it is supposed to serve, and for the citizens to be able to hold their state machinery accountable, they need accurate and adequate information regarding the activities of those that seek to govern them. However, in modern democracies it is often seen that those in governance often try to circumvent legal requirements of transparency and only pay lip service to this principle, while keeping their own functioning as opaque as possible.

This tendency to not give adequate information is very evident in the departments of the government which are concerned with surveillance, and merit can be found in the argument that all of the government's clandestine surveillance activities cannot be transparent otherwise they will cease to be "clandestine" and hence will be rendered ineffective. However, this argument is often misused as a shield by the government agencies to block the disclosure of all types of information about their activities, some of which may be essential to determine whether the current surveillance regime is working in an effective, ethical, and legal manner or not. It is this exploitation of the argument, which is often couched in the language of or coupled with concerns of national security, that this paper seeks to address while voicing the need for greater transparency in surveillance activities and structures.

In the first section the paper examines the need for transparency, and specifically deals with the requirement for transparency in surveillance. In the next part, the paper discusses the regulations governing telecom surveillance in India. The final part of the paper discusses possible steps that may be taken by the government in order to increase transparency in telecom surveillance while keeping in mind that the disclosure of such information should not make future surveillance ineffective.

Need for Transparency

In today's age where technology is all pervasive, the term "surveillance" has developed slightly sinister overtones, especially in the backdrop of the Edward Snowden fiasco. Indeed, there have been several independent scandals involving mass surveillance of people in general as well as illegal surveillance of specific individuals. The fear that the term surveillance now invokes, especially amongst those social and political activists who seek to challenge the status quo, is in part due to the secrecy surrounding the entire surveillance regime. Leaving aside what surveillance is carried out, upon whom, and when - the state actors are seldom willing and open to talk about how surveillance is carried out, how decisions regarding who and how to target, are reached, how agency budgets are allocated and spent, how effective surveillance actions were, etc. While there may be justified security based arguments to not disclose the full extent of the state's surveillance activities, however this cloak of secrecy may be used illegally and in an unauthorized manner to achieve ends more harmful to citizen rights than the maintenance of security and order in the society.

Surveillance and interception/collection of communications data can take place under different legal processes in different countries, ranging from court-ordered requests of specified data from telecommunications companies to broad executive requests sent under regimes or regulatory frameworks requiring the disclosure of information by telecom companies on a pro-active basis. However, it is an open secret that data collection often takes place without due process or under non-legal circumstances.

It is widely believed that transparency is a critical step towards the creation of mechanisms for increased accountability through which law enforcement and government agencies access communications data. It is the first step in the process of starting discussions and an informed public debate regarding how the state undertakes activities of surveillance, monitoring and interception of communications and data. Since 2010, a large number of ICT companies have begun to publish transparency reports on the extent that governments request their user data as well as requirements to remove content. However, governments themselves have not been very forthcoming in providing such detailed information on surveillance programs which is necessary for an informed debate on this issue.[1] Although some countries currently report limited information on their surveillance activities, e.g. the U.S. Department of Justice publishes an annual Wiretap Report (U.S. Courts, 2013a), and the United Kingdom publishes the Interception of Communications Commissioner Annual Report (May, 2013), which themselves do not present a complete picture, however even such limited measures are unheard of in a country such as India.

It is obvious that Governments can provide a greater level of transparency regarding the limits in place on the freedom of expression and privacy than transparency reports by individual companies. Company transparency reports can only illuminate the extent to which any one company receives requests and how that company responds to them. By contrast, government transparency reports can provide a much greater perspective on laws that can potentially restrict the freedom of expression or impact privacy by illustrating the full extent to which requests are made across the ICT industry. [2]

In India, the courts and the laws have traditionally recognized the need for transparency and derive it from the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed in our Constitution. This need coupled with a sustained campaign by various organizations finally fructified into the passage of the Right to Information Act, 2005, (RTI Act) which amongst other things also places an obligation on the sate to place its documents and records online so that the same may be freely available to the public. In light of this law guaranteeing the right to information, the citizens of India have the fundamental right to know what the Government is doing in their name. The free flow of information and ideas informs political growth and the freedom of speech and expression is the lifeblood of a healthy democracy, it acts as a safety valve. People are more ready to accept the decisions that go against them if they can in principle seem to influence them. The Supreme Court of India is of the view that the imparting of information about the working of the government on the one hand and its decision affecting the domestic and international trade and other activities on the other is necessary, and has imposed an obligation upon the authorities to disclose information.[3]

The Supreme Court, in Namit Sharma v. Union of India,[4] while discussing the importance of transparency and the right to information has held:

"The Right to Information was harnessed as a tool for promoting development; strengthening the democratic governance and effective delivery of socio-economic services. Acquisition of information and knowledge and its application have intense and pervasive impact on the process of taking informed decision, resulting in overall productivity gains .

……..

Government procedures and regulations shrouded in the veil of secrecy do not allow the litigants to know how their cases are being handled. They shy away from questioning the officers handling their cases because of the latters snobbish attitude. Right to information should be guaranteed and needs to be given real substance. In this regard, the Government must assume a major responsibility and mobilize skills to ensure flow of information to citizens. The traditional insistence on secrecy should be discarded."

Although these statements were made in the context of the RTI Act the principle which they try to illustrate can be understood as equally applicable to the field of state sponsored surveillance. Though Indian intelligence agencies are exempt from the RTI Act, it can be used to provide limited insight into the scope of governmental surveillance. This was demonstrated by the Software Freedom Law Centre, who discovered via RTI requests that approximately 7,500 - 9,000 interception orders are sent on a monthly basis.[5]

While it is true that transparency alone will not be able to eliminate the barriers to freedom of expression or harm to privacy resulting from overly broad surveillance,, transparency provides a window into the scope of current practices and additional measures are needed such as oversight and mechanisms for redress in cases of unlawful surveillance. Transparency offers a necessary first step, a foundation on which to examine current practices and contribute to a debate on human security and freedom.[6]

It is no secret that the current framework of surveillance in India is rife with malpractices of mass surveillance and instances of illegal surveillance. There have been a number of instances of illegal and/or unathorised surveillance in the past, the most scandalous and thus most well known is the incident where a woman IAS officer was placed under surveillance at the behest of Mr. Amit Shah who is currently the president of the ruling party in India purportedly on the instructions of the current prime minister Mr. Narendra Modi.[7] There are also a number of instances of private individuals indulging in illegal interception and surveillance; in the year 2005, it was reported that Anurag Singh, a private detective, along with some associates, intercepted the telephonic conversations of former Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh. They allegedly contacted political leaders and media houses for selling the tapped telephonic conversation records. The interception was allegedly carried out by stealing the genuine government letters and forging and fabricating them to obtain permission to tap Amar Singh's telephonic conversations. [8] The same individual was also implicated for tapping the telephone of the current finance minister Mr. Arun Jaitely.[9]

It is therefore obvious that the status quo with regard to the surveillance mechanism in India needs to change, but this change has to be brought about in a manner so as to make state surveillance more accountable without compromising its effectiveness and addressing legitimate security concerns. Such changes cannot be brought about without an informed debate involving all stakeholders and actors associated with surveillance, however the basic minimum requirement for an "informed" debate is accurate and sufficient information about the subject matter of the debate. This information is severely lacking in the public domain when it comes to state surveillance activities - with most data points about state surveillance coming from news items or leaked information. Unless the state becomes more transparent and gives information about its surveillance activities and processes, an informed debate to challenge and strengthen the status quo for the betterment of all parties cannot be started.

Current State of Affairs

Surveillance laws in India are extremely varied and have been in existence since the colonial times, remnants of which are still being utilized by the various State Police forces. However in this age of technology the most important tools for surveillance exist in the digital space and it is for this reason that this paper shall focus on an analysis of surveillance through interception of telecommunications traffic, whether by tracking voice calls or data. The interception of telecommunications actually takes place under two different statutes, the Telegraph Act, 1885 (which deals with interception of calls) as well as the Information Technology Act, 2000 (which deals with interception of data).

Currently, the telecom surveillance is done as per the procedure prescribed in the Rules under the relevant sections of the two statutes mentioned above, viz. Rule 419A of the Telegraph Rules, 1951 for surveillance under the Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009 for surveillance under the Information Technology Act, 2000. These Rules put in place various checks and balances and try to ensure that there is a paper trail for every interception request. [10] The assumption is that the generation of a paper trail would reduce the number of unauthorized interception orders thus ensuring that the powers of interception are not misused. However, even though these checks and balances exist on paper as provided in the laws, there is not enough information in the public domain regarding the entire mechanism of interception for anyone to make a judgment on whether the system is working or not.

As mentioned earlier, currently the only sources of information on interception that are available in the public domain are through news reports and a handful of RTI requests which have been filed by various activists.[11] The only other institutionalized source of information on surveillance in India is the various transparency reports brought out by companies such as Google, Yahoo, Facebook, etc.

Indeed, Google was the first major corporation to publish a transparency report in 2010 and has been updating its report ever since. The latest data that is available for Google is for the period between January, 2015 to June, 2015 and in that period Google and Youtube together received 3,087 requests for data which asked for information on 4,829 user accounts from the Indian Government. Out of these requests Google only supplied information for 44% of the requests.[12] Although Google claims that they "review each request to make sure that it complies with both the spirit and the letter of the law, and we may refuse to produce information or try to narrow the request in some cases", it is not clear why Google rejected 56% of the requests. It may also be noted that the number of requests for information that Google received from India were the fifth highest amongst all the other countries on which information was given in the Transparency Report, after USA, Germany, France and the U.K.

Facebook's transparency report for the period between January, 2015 to June, 2015 reveals that Facebook received 5,115 requests from the Indian Government for 6,268 user accounts, out of which Facebook produced data in 45.32% of the cases.[13] Facebook's transparency report claims that they respond to requests relating to criminal cases and "Each and every request we receive is checked for legal sufficiency and we reject or require greater specificity on requests that are overly broad or vague." However, even in Facebook's transparency report it is unclear why 55.68% of the requests were rejected.

The Yahoo transparency report also gives data from the period between January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015 and reveals that Yahoo received 831 requests for data, which related to 1,184 user accounts from the Indian Government. The Yahoo report is a little more detailed and also reveals that 360 of the 831 requests were rejected by Yahoo, however no details are given as to why the requests were rejected. The report also specifies that in 63 cases, no data was found by Yahoo, in 249 cases only non content data[14] was disclosed while in 159 cases content [15] was disclosed. The Yahoo report also claims that "We carefully scrutinize each request to make sure that it complies with the law, and we push back on those requests that don't satisfy our rigorous standards."

While the Vodafone Transparency Report gives information regarding government requests for data in other jurisdictions, [16] it does not give any information on government requests in India. This is because Vodafone interprets the provisions contained in Rule 25(4) of the IT (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009 (Interception Rules) and Rule 11 of the IT (Procedure and Safeguards for Monitoring and Collecting Traffic Data or Information) Rules, 2009 as well as Rule 419A(19) of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1954 which require service providers to maintain confidentiality/secrecy in matters relating to interception, as being a legal prohibition on Vodafone to reveal such information.

Apart from the four major companies discussed above, there are a large number of private corporations which have published transparency reports in order to acquire a sense of trustworthiness amongst their customers. Infact, the Ranking Digital Rights Project has been involved in ranking some of the biggest companies in the world on their commitment to accountability and has brought out the Ranking Digital Rights 2015 Corporate Accountability Index that has analysed a representative group of 16 companies "that collectively hold the power to shape the digital lives of billions of people across the globe".

Suggestions on Transparency

It is clear from the discussions above, as well as a general overview of various news reports on the subject, that telecom surveillance in India is shrouded in secrecy and it appears that a large amount of illegal and unauthorized surveillance is taking place behind the protection of this veil of secrecy. If the status quo continues, then it is unlikely that any meaningful reforms would take place to bring about greater accountability in the area of telecom surveillance. It is imperative, for any sort of changes towards greater accountability to take place, that we have enough information about what exactly is happening and for that we need greater transparency since transparency is the first step towards greater accountability.

Transparency Reports

In very simplistic terms transparency, in anything, can best be achieved by providing as much information about that thing as possible so that there are no secrets left. However, it would be naïve to say that all information about interception activities can be made public on the altar of the principle of transparency, but that does not mean that there should be no information at all on interception. One of the internationally accepted methods of bringing about transparency in interception mechanisms, which is increasingly being adopted by both the private sector as well as governments, is to publish Transparency Reports giving various details of interception while keeping security concerns in mind. The two types of transparency reports that we require in India and what that would entail is briefly discussed below:

By the Government

The problem with India's current regime for interception is that the entire mechanism appears more or less adequate on paper with enough checks and balances involved in it to prevent misuse of the allotted powers. However, because the entire process is veiled in secrecy, nobody knows exactly how good or how rotten the system has become and whether it is working to achieve its intended purposes. It is clear that the current system of interception and surveillance being followed by the government has some flaws, as can be gathered from the frequent news articles which talk about incidents of illegal surveillance. However, without any other official or more reliable sources of information regarding surveillance activities these anecdotal pieces of evidence are all we have to shape the debate regarding surveillance in India. It is only logical then that the debate around surveillance, which is informed by such sketchy and unreliable news reports will automatically be biased against the current mechanism since the newspapers would also only be interested in reporting the scandalous and the extraordinary incidents. For example, some argue that the government undertakes mass surveillance, while others argue that India only carries out targeted surveillance, but there is not enough information publicly available for a third party to support or argue against either claim. It is therefore necessary and highly recommended that the government start releasing a transparency report such as the one's brought out by the United States and the UK as mentioned above.

There is no need for a separate department or authority just to make the transparency report and this task could probably be performed in-house by any department, but considering the sector involved, it would perhaps be best if the Department of Telecommunications is given the responsibility to bring out a transparency report. These transparency reports should contain certain minimum amount of data for them to be an effective tool in informing the public discourse and debate regarding surveillance and interception. The report needs to strike a balance between providing enough information so that an informed analysis can be made of the effectiveness of the surveillance regime without providing so much information so as to make the surveillance activities ineffective. Below is a list of suggestions as to what kind of data/information such reports should contain:

Reports should contain data regarding the number of interception orders that have been passed. This statistic would be extremely useful in determining how elaborate and how frequently the state indulges in interception activities. This information would be easily available since all interception orders have to be sent to the Review Committee set up under Rule 419A of the Telegraph Rules, 1954.
The Report should contain information on the procedural aspects of surveillance including the delegation of powers to different authorities and individuals, information on new surveillance schemes, etc. This information would also be available with the Ministry of Home Affairs since it is a Secretary or Joint Secretary level officer in the said Ministry which is supposed to authorize every order for interception.
The report should contain an aggregated list of reasons given by the authorities for ordering interception. This information would reveal whether the authorities are actually ensuring legal justification before issuing interception or are they just paying lip service to the rules to ensure a proper paper trail. Since every order of interception has to be in writing, the main reasons for interception can easily be gleaned from a perusal of the orders.
It should also reveal the percentage of cases where interception has actually found evidence of culpability or been successful in prevention of criminal activities. This one statistic would itself give a very good review of the effectiveness of the interception regime. Granted that this information may not be very easily obtainable, but it can be obtained with proper coordination with the police and other law enforcement agencies.
The report should also reveal the percentage of order that have been struck down by the Review Committee as not following the process envisaged under the various Rules. This would give a sense of how often the Rules are being flouted while issuing interception orders. This information can easily be obtained from the papers and minutes of the meetings of the Review Committee.
The report should also state the number of times the Review Committee has met in the period being reported upon. The Review Committee is an important check on the misuse of powers by the authorities and therefore it is important that the Review Committee carries out its activities in a diligent manner.

It may be noted here that some provisions of the Telegraph Rules, 1954 especially sub-Rules 17 and 18 of Rule 419A as well as Rules 22, 23(1) and 25 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Monitoring and Collecting Traffic Data or Information) Rules, 2009 may need to be amended so as to make them compliant with the reporting mechanism proposed above.

By the Private Sector

We have already discussed above the transparency reports published by certain private companies. Suffice it to say that reports from private companies should give as much of the information discussed under government reports as possible and/or applicable, since they may not have a large amount of the information that is sought to be published in the government reports such as whether the interception was successful, the reasons for interception, etc. It is important to have ISPs provide such transparency reports as this will provide two different data points for information on interception and the very existence of these private reports may act as a check to ensure the veracity of the government transparency reports.

As in the case of government reports, for the transparency reports of the private sector to be effective, certain provisions of the Telegraph Rules, 1954 and the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Monitoring and Collecting Traffic Data or Information) Rules, 2009, viz. sub-Rules 14, 15 and 19 of Rule 419A of the Telegraph Rules, 1954 and Rules 20, 21, 23(1) and 25 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Monitoring and Collecting Traffic Data or Information) Rules, 2009.

Overhaul of the Review Committee

The Review Committee which acts as a check on the misuse of powers by the competent authorities is a very important cog in the entire process. However, it is staffed entirely by the executive and does not have any members of any other background. Whilst it is probably impractical to have civilian members in the Review Committee which has access to potentially sensitive information, it is extremely essential that the Committee has wider representation from other sectors specially the judiciary. One or two members from the judiciary on the Review Committee would provide a greater check on the workings of the Committee as this would bring in representation from the judicial arm of the State so that the Review Committee does not remain a body manned purely by the executive branch. This could go some ways to ensure that the Committee does not just "rubber stamp" the orders of interception issued by the various competent authorities.

Conclusion

It is not in dispute that there is a need for greater transparency in the government's surveillance activities in order to address the problems associated with illegal and unauthorised interceptions. This paper is not making the case that greater transparency in and by itself will be able to solve the problems that may be associated with the government's currency interception and surveillance regime, however it is not possible to address any problem unless we know the real extent of it. It is essential for an informed debate and discussion that the people participating in the discussion are "informed", i.e. they should have accurate and adequate information regarding the issues which are being discussed. The current state of the debate on interception is rife with individuals using illustrative and anecdotal evidence which, in the absence of any other evidence, they assume to be the norm.

A more transparent and forthcoming state machinery which regularly keeps its citizens abreast of the state of its surveillance regime would be likely to get better suggestions and perhaps less criticisms if it does come out that the checks and balances imposed in the regulations are actually making a difference to check unauthorized interceptions, and if not, then it is the right of the citizens to know about this and ask for reforms.

[1] James Losey, "Surveillance of Communications: A Legitimization Crisis and the Need for Transparency", International Journal of Communication 9(2015), Feature 3450-3459, 2015.

[2] Id.

[3] Namit Sharma v. Union of India, http://www.judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=39566.

[4] http://www.judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=39566 . Although the judgment was overturned on review, however this observation quoted above would still hold as it has not been specifically overturned.

[5] http://sflc.in/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/SFLC-FINAL-SURVEILLANCE-REPORT.pdf .

[6] James Losey, "Surveillance of Communications: A Legitimization Crisis and the Need for Transparency", International Journal of Communication 9 (2015), Feature 3450-3459, 2015.

[7] http://gulail.com/the-stalkers/ .

[8] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Amar-Singh-phone-tap-accused-tracked-Arun-Jaitleys-mobile/articleshow/18582508.cms .

[9] http://ibnlive.in.com/news/arun-jaitley-phonetapping-case-all-accused-get-bail/394997-37-64.html .

[10] For a detailed discussion of the Rules of interception please see Policy Paper on Surveillance in India, by Vipul Kharbanda, http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/policy-paper-on-surveillance-in-india .

[11] As an example please see http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/rti-on-officials-and-agencies-authorized-to-intercept-telephone-messages-in-india .

[12] https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/countries/ .

[13] https://govtrequests.facebook.com/country/India/2015-H1/ .

[14] Non-content data (NCD) such as basic subscriber information including the information captured at the time of registration such as an alternate e-mail address, name, location, and IP address, login details, billing information, and other transactional information (e.g., "to," "from," and "date" fields from email headers).

[15] Data that users create, communicate, and store on or through Yahoo. This could include words in a communication (e.g., Mail or Messenger), photos on Flickr, files uploaded, Yahoo Address Book entries, Yahoo Calendar event details, thoughts recorded in Yahoo Notepad or comments or posts on Yahoo Answers or any other Yahoo property.

[16] https://www.vodafone.com/content/sustainabilityreport/2014/index/operating_responsibly/privacy_and_security/law_enforcement/country_by_country.html .

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/transparency-in-surveillance

Transformaking 2015 : International Summit on Critical and Transformative Making, Yogyakarta

sharath — 2016-06-18T18:00:08Z

Transformaking 2015 brought together makers, scientist, hackers, bricoleurs, researchers, artists, designers and other interdisciplinary practitioners from across the globe in a series of Residency and Research Program, Symposium, Exhibition, Fair, and Satellite Projects. It was held from August 10 to September 20, 2015. Transformaking 2015 was organized by HONF Foundation & CATEC (Culture Arts Technoloy Empowerment Community) in partnership with the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS), Common Room, Crosslab, and Nicelab.

More information on the event can be accessed on this website. I presented a talk Open Spectrum and Open Science – Policy and Future Opportunities. I was also a speaker in a panel Encouraging Innovations through Communication and Open Source Culture with fellow panelists Tom Rowlands (Future Everything), Gustav Hariman (Common Room, Bandung) and Colette Tron (Alphabetville) and moderated by Sachet Manandhar of Karkhana Labs, Nepal.

As with many other societies, Indonesia has a distinct maker culture that goes back centuries. The rise of collective movements in the network culture following the digital revolution — with associated terms such as DIY (do-it-yourself), DIWO (do-it-with-others), open source, maker and hacker spaces — only reinvigorates and replicates traditional production practices at the grass-roots level: verbal passing of knowledge both vertical (between generations) and horizontal (among community members), voluntary communal division of labour, inventiveness to overcome limited infrastructures, driven by the need to find solutions for a better life rather than personal profit. Our forefathers were the genuine makers.

The burgeoning maker movement has been receiving growing recognition as it demonstrates great potential to address concerns and provide innovative solutions at a local, citizen level where established socio-political systems fail. As the makers and associated maker culture come into contact with large industries, they run the risk of being reduced into commodities. A critical attitude is essential to keep the maker movement genuine with lessons from our forefathers in mind and catalyze practices create solutions and sustainable implementations in a process of transformative making — or Transformaking.

The summit aimed to:

Create a forum for all stakeholders to discuss views, practices, questions, and issues in the realm of critical making movement
Exhibit projects that create tangible, transformative solutions at a citizen level
Produce usable tools and define dissemination strategies for catalyzing local transformations globally

The following is a note on the Conception of the Summit:

Conception of the Summit - Why 'Transformaking'?

The act of Making is not new, and has been an ongoing process over centuries of mankind, ever since the invention of Neanderthal tools, the wheel, cultural artifacts and practices, to the modern day space shuttle and modes of communication. Today’s networked knowledge society is catalyzing and affecting the process of Making and knowledge production in interesting ways by mediating the co-located and instantaneous access, dissemination and sharing of information amongst people across vast distances.

The notion of free labour accompanying a rising participation in the gift economy of network culture, is loaded with words such as DIY, Open Knowledge, Open Data, Free & Open Source, that blurs the lines of distinction between production & consumption, labour & cultural expression, and has transcended both the puritan new left movement on one hand and the neo-liberal free market ideology on the other.

There has evidently been a marked shift in the site of labour — from the factory to society, that autonomists have called ‘the social factory’ which challenges the very notion of capitalism from the inside. In Pierre Lévy’s own words — A shift from the Cartesian model of thought based on the singular idea of cogito (I think) to a collective or plural cogitamus (we think), seems to be the unifying goal represented by various models and spaces for thinking such as Makercultures, Think Tanks, Maker Movements, Maker Labs & Hacker/Maker Spaces.

This change in the process of making and knowledge production is further underlined by contextualized maker activity geared towards fueling change, thereby challenging traditional modes of production and consumption, creative and cultural expression, structures of societal organization, ownership, access, intellectual property and copyright regimes, models of participative democracy, citizen science and civic governance in a process of Transformative Making or –what we call – ‘Transformaking’.

Transformaking: The International Summit on Critical and Transformative Making 2015 shall bring together makers, hackers, bricoleurs, educators, researchers, theorists, artists and designers to:

A Symposium to self reflect, debate and put forth views with regards to their respective practices and dissect various complexities and questions that surround the areas of Critical and Transformative Making.
An Exhibition on Critical Making featuring completed and contextualized projects and productions.
Produce a tangible outcome, of the first International Summit, that focuses on collating diverse views, practices and usable tools along with strategizing modes of academic publication and dissemination for furthering meaningful local transformations, globally.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/transformaking-2015-international-summit-on-critical-and-transformative-making-yogyakarta

Transcript of the Plenary 1, WCIT-12

snehashish — 2012-12-03T13:58:08Z

Rough live-transcript of the first plenary session of the World Conference on International Telecommunications, 2012 (WCIT-12) held on December 3, 2012.

Raw transcript

World Conference on International Telecommunications
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
03 December 2012
14:30
Plenary 1

Services provided by:
Caption First, Inc.
P.O. Box 3066
Monument, CO 80132
1-877-825-5234
+001-719-481-9835
Www.captionfirst.com

********
This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.
********

RCC 14 A 1 roiing. roiing. roiing

(Please stand by. The meeting will begin momentarily)
And X irt. irts. Tell phony. ICT. Mobile telephony. Multi-stakeholder shareholder. Multi-shareholder. WCIT-12 WCIT. World Conference on International Telecommunications capita. Axis.

Raw transcript

World Conference on International Telecommunications
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
03 December 2012
14:30
Plenary 1

Services provided by:
Caption First, Inc.
P.O. Box 3066
Monument, CO 80132
1-877-825-5234
+001-719-481-9835
Www.captionfirst.com

********
This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.
********

(Please stand by. The meeting will begin momentarily)
.
>> He can Len sees. Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats. The first plenary will begin in a few minutes. Thank you.

(Please stand by. The meeting will begin momentarily)

.
>> Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.
I'm very happy to begin with you this first plenary session of the WCIT.
Ladies and gentlemen, in arc cord dance with the regular rules of procedure for conferences, meetings, and Committees of the union and rule 51, the United Arab Emirates have nominated Mr. Tarek Alawadi to open the first session. He comes from the am telecommunications regulatory agency and it is he who will be proceededing over the first heart of this meeting. Could I ask you to come up and join us on the Ross strum, please, and may I ask you to welcome him. Thank you.
(Applause)
*

>> TAREK AL-AWADI: In the name of God, the merciful, may the peace and blessings of a God be upon our prophet and his companions.
Dr. Hamadoun I. Toure', Secretary-General of the International telecommunications union, your Excellency, ladies and gent, guests, may I convai my greetings to you on behalf of the United Arab Emirates and welcome you here. We are now beginning our work at this first plenary session of the WCIT. I should like to wish you a very pleasant stay here in the United Arab Emirates and particularly in this wonderful City of Dubai.
We have in front of us document ADM/5. That is containing the agenda of the first plenary meeting of WCIT.
Do you all have a copy of the document? Are there any observations to be made on the agenda?
Document ADM/5.

Iran, please.
>> IRAN: I thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, congratulations to the United Arab Emirates for its 41st anniversary of establishment of the UAE and congratulations to you Chairman and to your self.
Chairman, we have some point to make with respect to document addendum -- sorry, ADM/5. Item 15.
D C4, examination and discussion of proposals from Member States.
We understand that according to the -- to today's morning session, this is a document allocated to the plenary. Before adopting the agenda, we would wish to request, if possible, German, some clarification with respect to the origin of this document and the rationale and argument by which this element would put -- have been put together to come to the plenary.
Mr. Chairman, we fully agree that on some principal issues it would be appropriate that plenary decide on that, and possibly come to some sort of consensus, and that would reduce the over load of the Committees and sub Working Groups. We fully agree with that. However apart from the logic and rational base which this document has been assembled, we would like also to know the working arrangements that should this or similar type of dock ument principal issue be discussed at the plenary and if we could not reach a consensus, what would be the subsequent action. Would it be given to a Committee? Would it be given to an ad hoc group of plenary or would it be given to different entities?
Having said that, because of the nature of this document, which is principles, once we agree on the content, any mechanism by which the subsequent discussion would be carried out needs to be totally transparent and open to all Member States.
As I have mentioned, ad hoc group of plenary one one solution. Another solution et would be assigned to other entities. But from the outset discussing this principle issue in some consultation which may not be open to all Member States may not be appropriate.
So before approving the agenda, we seek some clarification on the matter as I have suggested and I thank you very much, Chairman.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Iran.
Mr. Secretary-General, you want to say some?
>> Secretary-General: Frankly, this is not the type of start I wouldn't for this conference. So discussing whether this issue is on the table, you took five minutes and the whole world is listening to us.
And I beg you, please, this document is about whether you like this point 5 on the agenda or not. Then when we come to discussing the agenda item, you raise your points.
That's what this is about here. So I urge you, all delegates, let's try to be kind to one another and not waste the conference time in explanation, long explanations on these issues.
The point of the agenda here is whether point 15 should be on the agenda item. Then the DT 4 will be discussed and the sub stajs of it will be discussed then. That's how we present these documents. Therefore I don't want to go over explanations that I will go over in going over DT 4. So I'm sorry.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Secretary-General. I may switch to English right now just to say that before going for approval of the agenda, I just want to have a request to all of you, we are in the afternoon starting the first day here. Just a request from my side to all of you, so please if you can bear with me, I want all of you to be smiling. Real smiling.
You are here in the beautiful City of Dubai and I want all of you to be really happy. We would like to start the conference together, smoothly, and the issues have been raised and the principles so this one can be discussed during the conference. And there we can come with a solution for each one of them.
Algeria asked for the floor. Can you press...
>> ALGERIA: Thank you, sir.
Sir, the fact that we're not smiling doesn't mean that we don't want to smile, it means that many of us are tired. We have had long trips in order to come here. We haven't slept very much. Our planes were late, and that may explain why we haven't got a big smile on our faces. However, we are still very happy to be here in Dubai. It is, indeed, a city which is known for its hospitality, which is very faithful to its traditions and faithful to the Arab tradition of hospitality. I would therefore, sir, like to support what Mr. Aresti said and convey to you Algeria's best wishes on the 41st anniversary of the founding of the United Arab Emirates.
Having made those points, sir, we cannot at this stage I think preJudge what a general da item 15 will -- agenda item 15 will involve. I don't think we can ask you to put it within brackets as of now. We do, however, think that 15 will include documents from Member States. And I see that agenda item 10 also deals with documents, including documents submitted by Member States.
It's entitled allocation of documents to Committees, so I think we can assume that it will also cover agenda item 15. Therefore, as far as I can see it, agenda item 10 is sufficient of itself at this stage in our conference. And here I agree with the Secretary-General, I do not think we should waste our time singling out one document over any other documents.
We are going to consider agenda item 10, which as I say is the allocation of documents to Committee, and in my opinion that will also cover agenda item 15.
Thank you.
>> CHAIR: I thank the representative of Algeria. Thank you for your proposal.
I would like to ask the Secretariat to be kind enough to provide us additional information on DT 4 then we will take the appropriate zition.
>> Secretariat: DT 1 contains all of the proposals that have been made to this conference. As the Distinguished Delegate from Algeria mentioned, DT 3 is the allocation of documents, and we will of course come to that in the course of this first plenary meeting.
DT 4 was prepared on the basis of DT 3. But of course DT 3 needs to be approved first. And what DT 4 is, is it's an extract of the proposals that are contained in DT 1 that are allocated into this plenary.
So I hope that that clarifies. But as the delegate from Algeria mentioned, we do have to first agree on the respective allocation of proposals.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much. If I understand this document DT 4 is an information document, showing how the proposals are allocated or distributed.
We will first of all discuss agenda item 10, allocation of documents to Committees, and I think that will be sufficient to deal with the issue.
Once again, could I urge all of us to approve the agenda as it currently stands in ADM/5 draft agenda of the first plenary meeting? Do I have your approval?
Any comment?

In that case, the agenda is adopted. Thank you.

The agenda of the first plenary meeting of the World Conference on International Telecommunications is there by adopted.
I would like to move on to agenda item number 3. Election of the Chairman of the conference. I would like to ask the Secretary-General, doctor Hamadoun I. Toure', to be kind enough to make the nomination. Thank you.
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The heads of delegations meeting met this morning, and we propose the nomination of Mr. Mohamed Nasser Al-Ghanim, Director General of the ITU United Arab Emirates to be elected Chairman of the conference.
I would like to submit it for your approval.
(Applause)

>> CHAIR: In the name of God the merciful. Secretary-General, Dr. Hamadoun I. Toure', Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, peace be upon you and God's mercies and blessings.
I would should like to extend my thanks to the entire ITU and the Secretary-General and representatives of the Member States on the precious trust you have shown me to head the World Conference on International Telecommunications 2012.
Ladies and gentlemen, WCIT occupies a special place in the telecommunications industry, and information technology, because of developments and changes witnessed by the industry during the past two decades.
That has not been matched by modifications of the International telecommunication regulations governing the industry at the levels since it was since in 1988 at the conference in Melbourne, Australia. We have moved from voice communications to video and data communications, from fixed to mobile communications. And greater reliance on infrastructure and applications that run according to Internet Protocols is being seen.
This has necessary stated the need to modern size and develop these regulations to reflect this evolution.
The regulations will be the general principles of International communication operation and interconnection and interoperability globally. And they will be pillars of balanced development and operation of the technical facilities that everyone needs.
This is important for the development of societies on many levels, particularly in terms of economic, cognitive, cultural, social and other types of development.
Ladies and gentlemen, the topics to be discussed at this conference are particularly important. There are sensitive issues here which require us to cooperate fully to find a compromise. We need compromises, I repeat. A consensus in the interests of all the countries of the world. So I'd like to call upon you to cooperate with me through your experience and skills in the domains with which we're dealing.
I will need advice as well from you. We should all cooperate to achieve our common goals, namely to make this conference a success. Through the efforts which have been made since the first agreement was signed in 1988.
Colleagues, this conference will discuss important topics in a very limited timeframe and so we need to strive to adopt the following principles, if you agree with this, to achieve the desired goals in time.
First of all, optimal use of time. Secondly, we need to work in order to reach consensual decisions that will satisfy all parties. I repeat conceptual decisions that will satisfy all parties.
Thirdly, we need to make sincere efforts to overcome the outstanding issues. And we need of course to demonstrate flexibility and hear others' opinions.
I myself will be present with you to determine and follow the course of the discussions. I wish you a full measure of success and stand convinced that close cooperation will lead us to appropriate solutions for all.
Thank you very much.
(Applause)

>> CHAIR: Thank you. And now we will go to the election of the Vice Chairman of the conference. And I give the floor to the Secretary-General of the ITU, to Hamadoun I. Toure'.
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you, Mr. Chairman. From meeting of the heads of delegations meeting today, the vice Chairs for the conference are as following.
Mr. Edgardo Cabarios, Phil peens. Ambassador, his excellence Nikolai Nikiforov, Russian. Mr. Gift, and Dr. From Egypt. Prove I give you this list for approval and for approval of the conference.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Secretary-General vrnl the names and proposals for the Vice Chairmans of the conference is put forward for you for approval.
(Applause)
*
And now we move to item number 6 of the agenda of the first plenary, the address by the Secretary-General. Mr. Toure', you have the floor.

>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you. Good afternoon again. Excellencies. Ministers, Mr. Chairman, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen and friends.
I would like to thank you for this opportunity to speak in some detail about the work we are engaged in here in Dubai over the next two weeks.
Firstly, however, I would like to take a moment to honor the achievements of the original ITRs which came out of the Melbourne conference in 1988. The 1988 ITRs were negotiated by publicly minded civil servants and telecom engineers who were in those days one and the same.
They acknowledged the tremendous public benefit inherent in communications networks and services. As a result, the original ITRs paved the way for the phenomenal growth we have witnessed across the information and communication technology sector. The original ITRs established milestone principles of public service. Acknowledged the right of users to communicate by accessing networks. Recognized the right to operate free from the harm to technical facilities, and enabled the transition from the traditional settlement system to the new bilateral commercial agreements that have served us well for the past two decades, and which set the stage for the stellar growth in the exchange of International telecoms traffic, encompassing both voice and data. The original ITRs paved the way for the liberalization of the ICT sector, for which we should all be grateful. They paved the way for the explosive growth we have seen over the past two decades. In 1988, there were just 4.3 million mobile cellular subscriptions worldwide. Today there are over 6 billion, representing growth of over one thousand fold.
In 1988, hardly anybody was online. Today we are approaching 2.5 billion users of the Internet.
In proposing for this conference, we have seen and heard many comments about ITU or the United Nations trying to take over the Internet. Let me be very clear one more time: WCIT is not about taking over the Internet. And WCIT is not about Internet governance. WCIT is about making sure that we connect the billion people without access to mobile telephony, and that we connect the 4.5 billion people who are still off line.
The 1988 ITRs were instrumental in enabling rapid growth in the ICT sector. They also made possible the global deployment of the Internet and many other ITU activities continue to be essential components of Internet growth.
I can congratulate our friends from Canada at this point. I remember much respected Secretary-General of the time, the much missed Dick butler, who passed away at the end of last year.
At the time, we knew that the same tensions which we see today were a source of of tension at that time as well. But at the time we were undergthe Cold War and I'm surprised there are those who wish to bring that Cold War back here today.
I'd like here today to mention some of the aspects of the ITU, the standards of the ITU, which are used every day on the Internet and which didn't involve control.
Standards for end-user access equipment, such as modems, including XDLS and cable modems.
Compression standards. Security standards, including standards to combat spam. Standards for backbone networks, including fibre optics. And of course the radio frequencies used to implement WiFi, which you are no doubt using here in this room today.
None of this meant that the ITU was controlling anything or contributing to such control. In this second decade of the 21st Century, ICTs play an increasingly central role in our lives not just as a means of communication, but also as a source of news and, entertainment, information, and education.
For an increasing percentage of the global population, ICTs are also a vital source of income, saving, and employment opportunities.
Demand for ICTs continues to grow everywhere in the world. And deshould congratulate ourselves for successfully serving humanity so well. We managed to survive two world wars and a Cold War and a series of economic depressions and recessions.
This is not a fluke or a coincidence, it is a credit to the hard work each and every one of your Administrations has put in.
The practicing made in ICT growth over the past 25 years is the most extraordinary achievement and it has happened thanks at least in part to the principles and ground rules enshrined in the ITRs.
The Internet is no longer an innovation whose scope and benefits are limited to the developed world. It is a global phenomenon. I think we can all agree that the Internet is a valuable global public resource which every citizen in the world should be able to benefit from.
I hope we will reiterate that here.
I hope that in the 2012 version of the ITRs, we will manage to achieve certain goals.
As Ban-Ki moon the Secretary-General of the United Nations said this morning, the digital diindividual has no place in the knowledge economy of the 21st Century.
Distinguished Delegates, ladies and gentlemen.
I think we can also agree that continued progress in bringing the world online can only be assured by continuing to practice a multi-stakeholder approach. Here at WCIT-12, you can see an excellent demonstration of ITU as the original multi-stakeholder organisation. This is achieved here in Dubai by the composition of civil society, Government, as well as technical and legal experts gathered here today to work toward the common good.
ITU hation made every effort in the run up to this conference to ensure that everyone can have a say and that everybody's voice is heard. Indeed over the past weeks and months we have heard from all sides and all stakeholders. There has been a very healthy debate which spread online and through print media and across the Web and flew blogs and social media sites. This is an opportunity for me to thank all of those who have even criticized the event because their views were position positions that we all needed to hear.
And we appreciate everybody, every contribution that everyone has made here to the debate. I'm personally pleased to have been able to meet and to listen to so many representatives of civil society over the past months and to hear their concerns and their hopes for the future.
Here with us in the room, let us welcome the participation of civil society organisation, including International organisations such as art 19, public knowledge, IT for change and ISOC, and regional organisations such as CAPTA and ACSIS, coming all the way from Cameroon and central Africa.
As well as many others. So let me give a special welcome to ICANN, also, whose President and CEO, Mr. Fadi Chehade', addressed us this morning, and to whose Chairman, Chairman of ICANN, doctor doctor Steve Crocker is also here as a special guest and I look to exciting opportunities that lie ahead and can be achieved by ICANN and ITU together in a positive spirit of collaboration.
The work of ICANN and ITU can be and should be fully complementary. And we should note quite clearly that ITU has no wish to -- or desire to play a role in critical Internet resource such acidomain names and that ITU does not in any mandate to challenge ICANN's role and competency.
I believe under the Chairman's leadership, Mr. Fadi Chehade''s leadership, I am confident that a new season of cooperation will unfold and a new season that will benefit our connected world. This is a good demonstration of how wick ket 12 is very much an open door meeting.
We have on site participation through various delegations of all stakeholders. But we also welcome the presence of the world's media and members of the public, both here in Geneva as well as around the world through remote participation online. Such as things that we do in all of our plen potentiary conferences and our council meetings in Geneva.
We have heard many stakeholders over the past month, both in the form of formal contributions from Member States and formal contributions from our wider audience and of course through many articles and blogs that have been published. Indeed, there has been quite a lot of buzz and noise around the conference, which is the way it should be. But let me add a word here about silence. There is an old African saying: "Sigh silence is also a language, but not everybody speaks it. And certainly not everybody understands it, but it is a powerful language that we should all value." This is why it's also so important to know that the silent majority, what the silent majority also thinks. There will be some people who are voiceless. There are so many things we put online, but remember we only have one-third of the human population that is online. Two-thirds, large majority, who have not connected them and therefore they are not following our debates online. This is the silent majority. We have to listen to silence.
And it's powerful.
So while we welcome and indeed look forward to hearing many individual contributions over the next two weeks, we should also bear in mind one of Gandhi's great sayings: "Speak only if it improves upon the silence."
"Speak only when it improves upon silence."
Distinguished colleagues, you are here to negotiate a Treaty. Member States become parties to Treaties because they expect the benefits of signing the Treaty, whether commercial, moral, or potential benefits to outweigh any potential disadvantages.
My hope and conviction and I'm sure that this is shared by all of us here and out there, is that by coming here voluntarily to negotiate, you seek win-win solutions that benefit everyone, because there is so much to be gained.

Ladies and gentlemen, the most important goal to achieve is to bring the benefits of broadband to all the world's people. It is easy, here in Dubai, where we are provided with excellent facilities and connectivity, to forget that the Internet is still just a dream for two-thirds of the world's population. Most people in most of ITU's Member States still have no access to what could arguably be the greatest public good ever made available to humanity. In 1988, the ITRs led the way to ubiquitous mobile connectivity. How can we make sure that the ITRs 2012 do the same thing for broadband?
As Ban-Ki moon, the United Nations Secretary-General mentioned earlier this morning, "I trust that together, Governments, industry and civil society will rise to this occasion."
Here in Dubai, we will be looking at a number of areas where there is a great promise of being able to achieve compromise text-based on member state proposals, and in doing so set the stage for increased ICT infrastructure roll out and access around the world. And it includes broadband investment, energy efficiency, accessibility, security, the networks, the impact of unsolicited content or spam on the networks. Number misuse, roaming. When was the last time you came back home and had a very unpleasant surprise of higher roaming costs? Reducing taxation is a key issue, price transparency, nondiscriminatory pricing, the fostering of competitive and liberalized telecommunications markets, and freedom of expression. Let me remind you that we need to stick to high level principles, which drive continuous competition, innovation and growth.
I'm pleased to note that a number of contributions to WCIT-12 have reminded us of some key ITU declarations regarding these issue, and let me cite some of these. The report of the fifth world telecommunications development conference in 2010, Hyderabad, which highlighted the importance of telecommunications infrastructure and technology development, particularly in developing countries.
The Geneva declaration of principles adopted at WSIS which recognized that policies creating a favorable climate for stability, predictability and fair competition at all levels should be developed and implemented in a manner that attracts more private investment in telecommunications infrastructure.
The policy recommendations of the ITU/UNESCO broadband Commission for digital development for encouraging broadband infrastructure development, which were published in the State of broadband 2012 publication, achieving digital inclusion for all."
And it is just in this spirit that I graeted the broadband Commission for development in 2010 and I invited UNESCO to join me, because my considerations B will be dealing with the infrastructure, and UNESCO will be dealing with content regarding education, science or culture. So the two can come together and meet.
Our expectation in this room is not in the content business or in the infrastructure, how can we make it available, there is a lot of information out there and it needs to be online and so that everyone can access it in their languages, no matter what circumstances there, whether they are People with Disabilities or not.
Distinguished colleague, we all know that the discussions regarding Article 6 of the ITRs, dealing with financial matters will be delegate.
But we all agree, I'm sure, on the need to foster the continuing development of broadband and we all agree on the importance of competition in promoting investment, as recognized in the broadband Commission.
In light of those two points, I would urge you to consider how best to adapt Article 6 so that it will help to achieve the desired goals, to bring the benefits of broadband to all the world's people.
I keep reminding you on that. Because that's the basis, the fundamental, the objective, the final objective of this conference.
So some have said that broadband is a national matter, and therefore not within the scope of the ITRs.
It is hard to share this view, however, in a global village. In a village -- global village where commerce goes quickly beyond national borders and where we can all choose to buy products and services from other countries to suit our tastes and our pocket books. In a global village where my grandchildren can watch videos online at their home in New York, which have been uploaded by their friends in Europe or Africa or Asia. In a global village where health workers in even the remotest regions can consult the vast wealth of information and even other specialists online when making diagnoses and prescribing treatment. If a country does have adequate ICT infrastructure, and that must include broadband in this 21st Century, then it simply cannot participate in the global market.
That penalizes the citizens of that country, but it also penalizes the citizens of the other countries who cannot benefit from interacting with them. So access to modern high speed telecommunications is not merely a national matter. On the contrary, it's one of the most important International matters, something we have seen or been aware of since 1865, when Governments founded ITU, to address issues of International interconnection.
Different distributions from Member States have given us different views on what a revised framework might look like and I would like to thank all of our membership for this. So let's work together to find what the difference views have in common and find the consensus that will help drive growth in ICT networks over the next decades.
Distinguished Delegates, ladies and gentlemen, over the months leading to the WCIT, some incorrect information regarding this conference has been published in various media, and my staff and I have worked hard to try to correct them, the misinformation has not been helpful in terms of clarifying the plain facts and the enormous benefits we can hope to achieve here in Dubai over the next two weeks. But I would like nonetheless to thank all of those who have published material about WCIT-12, including the detracttors, who have done so much in just a few months to bring this important issue to the public eye, all around the world.
They have participated their way, in their fashion. It's a way of participating. But we have to listen to them as well. They made some relevant points, we may disagree with them, but we have to take them on board here.
Thanks to them, the ITRs have never been so much talked about, and as the Irish playwright Oscar Wildee once said "The only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about."
Let me take this opportunity to address some of the myths that have been created around WCIT-12 and to clarify several matters.
Freedom of Expression. And it has been suggest that had this conference might in some way act to restrict the open and free flow of information. In Article 33 of the ITU's constitution, however, Member States recognize the right of the public to correspond by means of the International service of public correspondence and the ITRs cannot contradict that provision, or indeed any of the articles in the ITU constitution.
This concept is paralleled in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which I will quote here in full.
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Clearly, there is universal agreement on this matter and these freedoms are not up for negotiation, every word has been negotiated carefully. It's not up for negotiation. We make reference of that in the preample of our Treaty here. So that nothing, nothing in this conference can contradict that.
Here in Dubai, we're not going to be challenging art 19 or any other is Article of the u verse sal declaration of human rights. I want to make sure that all of you out there are listening.
I welcome the proposal from Tunisia. It comes at a perfect time.
Fears also were expressed that new provisions in updated ITRs might have to legitimate tiz Government Ken soreship and I agree that this should not happen.
This conference will not stand in the way of the need to protect the right of the freedom of expression, the right to communicate, and the right to privacy.
But we must recognize that none of these freedoms can exist without security. Especially the online -- in the online world.
If you, your personal information, your banking details, or even your identity are not secure, then how can you use ICTs with trust and confidence?
Since the World Summit on Information Society, we have seen widespread support for greater recognition of the importance of security in the use of ICTs.
This delicate issue was assigned by WSIS in Tunisia, 2005, to ITU, and we understand very clearly that there is a fine line which must not be crossed, a fine line which must not be crossed, in balancing the needs for freedom and privacy, on one hand, and security on the other.
We have to keep that in mind. So let me urge you to work together in good faith to achieve a sound, reliable and Honorable compromise so that we all can benefit from cyberresilience instead of cyberthreats. Cybersecurity instead of cybercrime and cyberpeace ind stead of cyberwar. As I said before, the only way to win any war is to avoid it in the first place and in this conference is a very good place to start making peace.
Distinguished Delegates, let's talk about affordability. The simple Question of affordability remains the biggest single barrier faced by the billions of people around the world who are still off line. We all know that the cost of connectivity is too high in most developing countries, and not just in developing countries. Recently, in a New York hotel, I had to pay 76 dollars for three days' Internet access. That is the equivalent of 760 US dollars a month. How can anyone afford that? And yet the same connectivity is given to ever citizen in the U.S. At 999. 9.99. That is one of the successes of the national broadband plan in the United States. They have succeeded doing so.
Government has no control over what hotels will be doing, it's the same thing, they have no control over what the private sector does. We may encourage them to do something good so that everyone can benefit.
We are also aware of -- that International room roaming praises are in many parts of the world still too high. Let's discuss it. Find ways, but let's not go -- let's not cross the line and give them in detail what they should do, how they should do it. We should keep some key principles in here of transparency, affordability, of equal treatment, nondiscriminatory treatment, and full openness so that consumers know what they are paying for when they are paying it, before they use it. These are there principles I would like us to agree here and put it in a Treaty that will last long enough. We want to see greater Internet usage across the world and I presume that we want consumers to feel that they are getting good value for the money as they roam. We look forward to our -- to these discussions and debates over these issues over the next two weeks. And I'm sure that a consensus view will be found. In the true tradition of ITU, but let's disagree sometimes in the start of the discussion, let's not take anything personal. Let's debate, let's convince one another and let's understand one another's problems. Let's define them when you define a problem is half solved. And most of the time we may not agree on things simply because we don't have the same understanding of it. We're speaking after all in different languages. And that's normal. And from friction comes light. We will find ways to bring down the cost of Internet connectivity while ensuring sufficient revenues for operators to deploy broadband infrastructure. We will find ways that both consumers and operators feel that roaming places are fair and reasonable. And by conscientious, I mean consensus in the true tradition of ITU. We have done that all the time. It works here.
To reach consensus, delegates will need to show willingness to compromise, so I urge you to work together for the common good, again, in the true tradition of ITU.
In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleague, we must not be complacent in taking the benefits of online world for granted. One-third of the world's people, including those here in Dubai, expect to be able to access information easily online. One-third of the world's people expect to be able to give their children a proper education, and for their children to be able to access all the academic resources they need online. One-third of the world's people expect to be able to provide themselves and their families with decent healthcare and for their doctors and healthcare workers to provide the necessary access to the full wealth of medical information online.
But we all know that two-thirds of the world's people today do not have these privileges. And if we stay unconnected to the Internet, they will never have these privileges.
All people from all regions of the world have a right to participate in this knowledge society and the dawning digital economy:this includes people, no matter where they come from. This includes people, no matter what their personal circumstances. And this includes the 650 million people worldwide living with a disability of some kind.
So let me urge you to recognize the vital importance of measures to promote access to broadband around the world, in all countries, and in all region, and to help deliver total inclusion.
This is a moral duty. It's our moral duty. And George Washington, one of America's founding fares and great high minded public servant once said "Happiness and moral duty are inseparably connected."
This conference has the power to ensure continuing innovation, the free flow of information, an investment in network, services and applications. Ladies and gentlemen, I have no doubt that the work ahead of us at this conference will be intense. Constructive, and productive, and that, however, long denied the down will break. I have no doubt that we will sometimes struggle to find agreement, indeed, we will welcome differences of opinion and as we have always done here in Dubai, we will not see clashes between people, but friction between minds. Again, from friction comes light. And as we all know, the light, that light will help us see our common goal. *
To build a knowledge society, where everyone, whatever their circumstances, can access, use, create, and share information, that's what we need to do. We have the power to do this, together. We have the power to make the world a better place, together.
We have the power to create a brave new world, where society, social and economic justice prevails, together. So let's work together.
Thank you.
(Applause)

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Secretary-General, now we move to agenda item number 7. Structure of the conference, you can find it in DT 2. And I'll give now the floor to Mr. Secretary-General to present the document.

>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The document DT 2 as presented here has been again looked at by the informal hetz of delegations and the formal one. And we present it as a Committee here to the plenary for final approval. You have in this document the terms of reference of the different -- of the five Committees and two Working Groups. And I'm presenting this to you for your approval, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you.
The document DT 2 right now is put forward for your approval.
Thank you. The document is approved. I see no comments.
We move now to agenda item number 8. Election of the Chairman and advice Chairman of the Committees. And I give the floor to the Secretary-General to present the document.
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Committee one is composed by the vice Chair, the Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the conference and the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committees. Committee 2 is proposed Chairman Mr. Ravindra Jha. And vice Chair Mr. Bruno Ramos and Sameera Mohammad. Committee 2 is the credentials Committee. Committee 3 is the budget control.
Chairman, Mr. Bruce Gracie, from Canada. And Vice Chairman, misNurzat Boljobekova, from Kyrgyzstan. Committee 4. Editorial Committee. Chairman, Ms. Marie-Therese Alajoujanine, France.
Vice chairmen, Mr. Sami Salih Sudan.
Mr. Xue Fei Wang, China. Mr. Chris Woolford, United kingdom. Ms. Blanca Gonzalez Spain. Mr. Vladimir Minkin, as you can see, those are the representatives for the six official languages of the ITU, frens, and then the vice Chairs for Eric, Chinese, English, Spanish and the Russian languages.
Committee 5, review Committee. Proposed to have Chairman, Mr. Joshua Peprah from Ghana, and the following vice chairmen, Mr. Albert Nalbandian, Armenia, Mr. Luis Lucatero, Mexico. Mr. Frederic Riehl, Switzerland. Mr. Bob Horton, Australia, and Mr. Al-Mashakbeh Alansari, Jordan.
And the two Working Groups of that Committee 5 are as follows: Working Group come 5-1. That will be covering everything including Article 6 and 9, Chairman Bernadette Lewis, Trinidad and Tobago, and vice Chair Selichi Tsugawa, Japan.
And Mr. Fahid Al Fahasd. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Working Group come 5-2. Chairman Fabio Bigi of Italy and vice Chair Gertrude Aka. So far those are the names that we received Mr. Chairman and I propose this for approval of this Assembly.

>> CHAIR: Thank you. And now I ask the meeting to approve the names of the chairmen and vice khir men of the Committees and Working Groups.
(Applause)
Thank you, and I wish the chairmen and vice Chair mens of the Committees and Working Groups all the best for the conference.
Now, going to agenda item 9. Composition of the conference Secretariat and I give the floor to the Secretary-General again.
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you. The secretary of the conference is myself, Hamadoun I. Toure', Secretary-General of ITU.
The executive secretary, by the way, I don't know why they should not address something to secretary. I'm always secretary, never general, so we should probably find a way to change secretary into general. I'm just joking, because I see people... of practice secretary, Doreen Bogdan-Martin, administrative secretary, Mr. Sumaki. Legal affairs, plenary and come 1 steering, Doreen Bogdan-Martin. Committee two credentials, (?)
Committee 3. Budget control. Committee 4. Editorial Committee. Committee 5, review Committee, we have Richard Hill and Alexander Toko. Committee 5-1, we have again Richard hill and Mario Minavich. Working Group 5-2, articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10E and related matters, we have Petom Malure and Ms. Young. * I would also like to inform you that as I started the tradition, during the plenipotentiary conference after my election. I also assigned the elected officials to some of those Committees during the conference, so each and every official has been assigned a task. What did I have that detail here?
I have Mr. -- myself for the plenaries. And there Zhao is in charge of the budget Committee. Francois is Committee 2. And Malcolm Johnson, I'll be taking also Working Group 5. But the two Working Groups -- Committee 5, but the two Working Groups under that will be Malcolm Johnson for group 1. And
>> BRAHIMA SANOU: Subpoena for the Working Group 2. And they will be reporting to me during the course of the conference to facilitate the work here. I have experimented that in the past two plenipotentiary conferences it worked very well and I intend to continue to do so.
So please notice all of that. But of course beyond those humble people who have been appear .ed here, I can assure you that all ITU staff present here and those in Geneva working for us online will be at your disposal to make and facilitate the work of this conference.
So I present that for your information shall Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. *
>> CHAIR: Thank you. And I'm sure that those people have been working very, very hard and can tell you before the conference and I'm sure they will be of great assistance to everyone here.
Now we can move to agenda item 10, allocation of documents to Committees. And I want you to pull DT 3 and I give the floor to the Secretary-General.
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you, Mr. Chairman, the recommend DT 3 which proposals an initial allocation and I repeat initial allocation of documents.
But if you allow me, I would like to point out that DT 3 proposals and allocation of proposals received from Member States as well as reports by the Working Group, the Working Group to propose for WCIT. New documents will be referred by the conference Chairman to Committees and plenarys, in plenary, as appropriate in accordance with the general rules number 82.
For contributions, recently received and committed, the secretary jath I can't tell is doing his best to ensure timely processing and publication. When a document comes, we make sure that it's available as soon as possible in all of the six official languages. It's published in the original language first for efficiency. But please forgive us if there is a small delay between the original publication of the original document and the translator -- translated ones. Our people are working in different parts of the world for us to expedite that.
So I present this for your approval, Mr. Chairman. Of course, membership may as usual suggest some modifications in this, and we I think it is the tradition of the unit. Thank you very much.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. And I submit this document to the meeting for approval with the understanding that this document is going to be updated by the Secretariat as necessary when the Member States wish to add, modify their proposals.
I see that the Russian Federation is asking for the floor. Russian Federation shall you have the floor.
>> Russian Federation: Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, first of all I want to congratulate the Chairman of the conference on the selection. We looked at the allocation of document s care feely and wree want number 27 one to be looked at, at the plenary meeting. The federation is suggesting additions to the ITRs, the purpose of which is to formulate an approach and understanding of Internet and ICT as a new global communications infrastructure and also as part of the national communications infrastructure of each individual Member State. The document contains proposals to Article 2 definition and a new Article 3 A Internet work. Our proposal on 3 A and 5 A is not referred to anywhere in the documents in the plenary, and we do have a exam 6 examples of other contribution were contributions were taken into account. In order to ad sure that we have the contribution of all States and after discussion of these documents at the plenary, we think that the more detailed proposals could be considered in the working parties of Working Group 5.
These proposals echo what we have already heard, the need for transparency, the need for openness, the need to -- through doors and Windows open. The need to open ourselves up to the Oasis rather than close ourselves off into a council or effort.
Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you, the Russian Federation.
The document is going to be updated, so document 27 to be allocated to the plenary and the Secretariat is going to update this document and present it, it will be uploaded for the delegates' information.
United States?
>> UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And we wish to join with the Russian Federation in congral grat lateing you on your selection as Chair and we would of course wish you and all colleagues a successful conference.
Mr. Chairman, as we look at this document, a number of questions occur. As this is a document that allocates by proposals, in addition to document number, there may be a greater clarification needs to be brought to the document.
For example, this document we are to understand this document in what manner in terms of method of proceeding. For example, in the plenary sessions, there are a number of proposals that are listed against the plenary. Is it the proposal or view, Mr. Chairman, that we would take each of those proposals in succession, starting from the top and proceeding to the last item? That's the first Question.
Secondly, Mr. Chairman, there was an indication by the Secretary-General that this document includes contributions from the council Working Group, Member States, and the Secretariat. At least that is what we understood him to say.
Mr. Chairman, we would ask that you would confirm that at a Treaty conference, only proposals from Member States can be considered. And if, for example, a proposal that had ar ris CEN during the council Working Group has not been adopted by a Member State, then it cannot be introduced into the Treaty conference. That needs to be confirmed, Mr. Chairman.
So if we could, we would ask your clarification as to how we are to read this document, in terms of working method, and secondly we are to ask that you confirm that a Treaty conference pursuant to the constitutional Convention and ITU practice, only Member States can make a contribution to a Treaty conference.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank
>> CHAIR: Thank you, United States.
First of all, thank you for your very good questions. On the plenary, I would propose not to take the documents number in order. We will come to it when it comes to examination and discussions of proposals by Member States.
And that's going to -- we will put at least, to start with, but we will come to it, at a later stage. And first discuss the principles for the conference and then take issues as we go in terms of priority.
To set the tone right for the conference and the complexity of issues that we have, and we have at hand.
On the second issue, your understanding is correct. The conference -- the council Working Group for the preparatory process of WCIT is gost going to be presented only for information and only Member States proposals are purt forward and will be considered by the conference.
China and then Japan. I'll take them both and then we will... then we will get back to this. China.
>> CHINA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We are very happy to come to the beautiful City of Dubai. The flower in the desert. This is the first time for us to speak, we send, then, congratulations to you and we will work together with you and make efforts to make this conference a success.
Mr. Chairman, regarding to DT 4 document, we have several questions through you to the Secretariat for clarification. DT 4, how come that DT 4 has come to the plenary session? What is the nature and status of this document and what is the relationship between this DT 4 and other documents. DD 2 1 and 4, what is the relationship between DT 1 and 4? Maybe there is some overt lap.
I -- maybe there is some overlap. As to DT 1 and 4, is that a summary of all of their proposals, either we say that DT 4 is not a complete document. For an example, some of the ACP proposals are not included. For example, 5 A 1, concerning the security issues, it's not included in the DT 4 document.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. Japan?
>> JAPAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Our Question is concerning DT 3. When I look at this DT 3,s I was surprised to see that many items are are listed against the plenary and I believe that all the proposals concerning this provision of ITR should be first reviewed in Committee 5. And when I look at this, each number, carefully, it's all the proposals concerning the preamble and Article 1 is listed there. And besides, all proposals concern the name of each Article, like Article 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Only the title is listed there. So I really don't understand what is their idea of this listing of the preamble, Article 1, and just the name of the Article there, of the document to be allocated in the plenary.
Thank you very much.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. First of all, I wanted to answer to China's Question.
DT 1 includes all proposals, so it's a complete document. DT 3 is just allocation of documents to the plenary, to Committees, and to Working Groups.
DT 4 is just items that were put together by the Secretariat to be addressed by the plenary. And as you know, there are issues that need to be addressed first by the plenary before it goes to the Working Group. And coming to Japan's Question, you are right. There has been a careful selection so that we make some progress on the conference, and there are things that already have been put to the plenary so that -- and consideration was taken to all the proposals that come to the table to this conference, which some of them have majority agreement, and some major principles and some major differences that have to be resolved by the plenary. And that's why it was put to the plenary.
I hope my explanation is clear.
With that, can we approve DT 3? Thank you very much.
The document is approved, again with the understanding that this document is going to be updated by the secretary as necessary.

Sorry States and Mexico.
>> UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, we can go along with the consensus, but we should note that we remain confused as to exactly how we are to interpret DT 3 with respect to, in addition DT 4. It is not clear at all at this point how these documents are going to be taken in plenary. We would understand that today you are not going to address these documents in plenary. But that may need to be clarified, if you are going to address these documents in plenary.
If you are going to address these documents in plenary, which document comes first? Which document comes first and in which order of the proposals? If you are to take the first document that is listed in DT 3, there are six proposals against that document. Are they to take each of their proposals and present them to the plenary? If that's the principle, then by the time we goth get to other colleagues' proposals, there are two lines listed for proposals. At this rate, we certainly may not have what modestly could be called "Progress" in the conference.
But Mr. Chairman, we would again ask you to consider the difficulty that colleagues may be having in understanding exactly what this document means. This is not a document that is -- has clear precedence to other documents in this area that we have seen at Treaty conferences. So Mr. Chairman, we don't want to stand between the consensus, colleagues in consensus, but we do remain confused as to how we are to interpret this DT 3. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> CHAIR: Mexico?
>> MEXICO: Thank you, Chairman.
I'd like, firstly, to echo the congratulations which have been uttered on your election.
We would also like to congratulate the United Arab Emirates on their 41st anniversary.
I'd like now to say that we agree somewhat with what was said by the United States concerning how to interpret DT 3. We understand that this has now been approved and we done see any drawback to that. But we have a number of proposals in our document 20 for the plenary, and they do not appear in the work of Committee 5. So our Question is in what form will they be submitted to the plenary and what certain principles have been determined by the plenary, what will happen to the proposals which have been assigned to the plenary?
So if they have been determined how will they be built into the Working Groups?
Thank you very much.
>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mexico. And I'll try one more time.
The intention when we get to the examination -- and I'm planning to do it today, if I can -- and we will try to push to reach to this item. -- is to group key issues in plenary. For example, general principles. There are a number of Administration/regional groups who plented proposals for general principles. The preamble, the use of the term "Operating agency" or "Recognized operating agency."
The overlap with CS and CV, new proposals for Article 1, the binding nature of the ITU recommendations and basically finishes. So we will be taking those in groups. And once we come to the right group we will ask Administrations to submit their proposals.
For example, after moving from general principles and preamble, we will get into the operating agency and recognizable operating agency, because this is critical for the conference and we need to resolve it.
So we will group the the issues, and then we will allow Administrations to present their proposals and have some discussions.
I hope I'm clear United States and Mexico.
United Arab Emirates first and then United States of America.
>> UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: Thank you, Chairman. Indeed, you have actually summarized in your last intervention exactly what I wanted to say. There are some issues that are genetic by nature, as you can see, the two Working Groups at least one of them discuss more towards financial matters, and the other one is more about operational matters. However, these other issues that are genetic, and as you mentioned, the preamble, generals principles, maybe ROA versus AO, these are genetic issues that fall into the Working Groups and then we decide on them on something higher than the two works groups or the Committee itself and covers it by the plepnary in order to save time for the Working Groups and their discussions.
So the Question I think that was raised by the United States was more about we should find out what will be the mechanism that the plenary is going to use on discussing this, and I think this is something that we can discuss, whether we create an ad hoc group or is it something that the Chairman of the plenary prepares something for us? So this is something that I think we should take into account, what would be the mechanism on how we're going to discuss this, because it's definitely a valid point. The plenary wants to be as direct as possible.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We wish to express our appreciation to the United Arab Emirates who has stated very clearly for us the issue that we are trying to understand in terms of working procedures. Mr. Chairman, we can certainly can proceed in the fashion that you have laid out. We would ask as a first step in clarity if we could see exactly if writing what are the key principles that are to be addressed and when and what order will they be addressed and against which documents are the principles to be discussed?
Secondly, Mr. Chairman, we would note in that regard and you have correctly mentioned at least one of the subjects, that we have document 31 that seeks to address as a matter of some urgency of the conference the preamble, definition of telecommunications and the issue of ROA and OA. As you were providing clarity to how we're going to proceed, we will be very interested to know exactly then when document 31 would appear on the agenda.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. And I think as soon as we reach the urgent item to be concerned, I will lay down exactly, it will be very difficult to print it right now and distribute it, but I'll just lay down an order, as I just said, general principles, preamble, ROA and OA, overlap with CSCV, binding natures and others. I know this cannot be reached in plenary 1 but we will try to reach them today and I'm optimist particular to the OA/ROA issue before tomorrow's plenary.
With that, can we proceed?
Thank you.
I'll take two items before we have -- we have coffee break and try to be quick.
The agenda item 11, date of submission of the report of the Committee.
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Pursuant to the 11 provisions of the Convention and the procedures adopted at the previous plenipotentiary conferences, the plenary must decide on the date for submission of the report of the credential Committee.
* the preliminary draft time plan proposes that the first meeting of the Committee be on December 5. It is noted that the date of the Commission of the report of the Credentials Committee be Wednesday, 12 December.
I'm asking for your approval. Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. And it's put for the meeting for approval.
I see no comments --
Thank you. The document is approved.
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I forgot to mention an exception that was requested by the delegation of Mexico to have their approval on the 13th of December. This is due to national elects taking place in the country and therefore they have requested that and presented that to the heads of delegations meeting, and we should present this also, the delegates of the conference for allowing Mexico to present their credentials up to the 13th of December.
Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you.
Is the proposal bisect general approved? It's put for your approval.
Thank you.
We move to agenda item 12. Working hours of the meetings of the conference. I give the floor to the Secretary-General.
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to propose the following schedule in line with our past practices. 9:30 to 12:30 and 14:30 to 17:30 on weekdays.
On Friday, work will begin at 9 o'clock. And end at 12 o'clock. And the afternoon session will resume as usual at 14:30.
The Steering Committee will of course -- the work of the Steering Committee will be updated every time, but the first one will be meeting tonight. And I would like to present this for your approval and the Steering Committee will approve the general schedule of the work of the conference as well as a detailed timetable for the first week. And as we move along, the Steering Committee will report to you any changes made.
I present this for your approval, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. The time plan is -- the working hours of the commet meeting of the conference is put forward to you for approval and the steer Committee for today is going to start immediately after plenary.
So with that, I see no comments. So the working hours of the meeting of the conference is approved.
And the last thing before we break for coffee, I would ask the Secretary-General to present the participation request by International organisations.
Secretary-General?
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you, Mr. Chairman. According to number 279 of the Convention, ITU Convention, observers of International organisations other than those referred in numbers 269 A, 269 D, in this Convention, are invited in accordance with the 1 1 provisions of chapter 1 of the general rules of conferences. And Assemblies and meetings of the union. And those should be admitted to participate in the conference in an advisory Committee. See also annex resolution. Councilor-at-Large, International Academy and I would like to propose this conference approval for them to be accepted as observers -- advisers commast capacity in this conference. Thank you. kurj, ooun ooun ooun and International telecommunication Academy.
>> CHAIR: This is clear. They have asked to join in an advisory capacity and it's put forward for your approval.
I see no one is asking for the floor and the three entities have been approved. * and now, we will adjourn the meeting for coffee, 15 minutes, please, Secretary-General?
>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Mr. Chairman, just allow me to ask all delegates when you are taking the floor, we hope that the first speaker will congratulate the Chairman for his election and congratulate our host country for hosting us, and thank them on behalf of everybody. And so that, to save time of the conference, as the tradition in ITU, you don't have to repeat that every time you take the floor or even the first time for taking the floor for delegations. You can save it. We ask kindly the host -- our Chairman to accept that from all of you. I believe that saves tremendous time.
And also if you allow me, I will send a letter from this conference -- from this conference to His Highness here, the President of United Arab Emirates, thanking them and congratulating them also upon their 41st anniversarye so all of that will be done as a conference, so we will save valuable time and resources.
Thank you very much.
(Applause)

>> CHAIR: Thank you. And we will have a coffee break right now and we will come back at 4:40 sharp and we will start. We have lots of work for us in front of us, and we hope that we finish today by 5:30. So please enjoy your coffee break. (Break)

>> CHAIR: Seems I'll start the meeting without the Secretary-General.

>> CHAIR: Ladies and gentlemen, if you can resume your seat. resuming the plenary. And we will go straight to agenda item 14. Examination of the output of of the preparatory process. And I'll give the floor to Armenia, to present the document. Please.
>> ARMENIA: Thank you, Chairman.
Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, the Chairman of the council Working Group to prepare for the 2012 World Conference on International communications, Mr. Krustovyv has been unable to attend the conference which is why I've been requested to report the final report of the Working Group. Which now I'm doing.
The work to prepare for the 2012 World Conference on International communications was set up in accordance with council resolution 13 19. -- 13.12. The interpreter apologizes.
The plenipotentiary conference of 20 10 -- in 2010 in Guadalajara in its resolution, 17.01, 171.
Stipulated -- resolution 171 stipulated that the Working Group should continue to prepare for the 2012 WCIT.
That the agenda and the dates for the holding of the conference should be those which was stipulated in counsel resolution -- council resolution 137.
furthermore, the Working Group was to consider and study the results of the work done by ITU on the regulations. Discuss and consider all the proposals which are being made in the revision and review of those regulations, provided those proposals were in accordance with the goals of the union as set forth in Article 1 of the constitution of the organisation, were in accordance with the goals of the regulations as set forth in their Article 1 and then the Working Group was able to consider the proposals being made and the revision and review of Article 1 of the regulations.
It was also necessary to take into account technical progress, and the need for these proposals to be a topical for -- a topic and ripe for inclusion in an International Treaty.
Furthermore, the work of the Working Group was to prepare four months before the beginning of the conference a final consolidated report, and that so that the Member States particularly the developing Member States would be able to use it in their preparations for the WCIT 2012. The Working Group acting in accordance with council resolution 1317, and plenipotentiary conference resolution 171 held 8 meetings, and prepared a final consolidated report for WCIT 2012, so that the Member States could use it in their preparation of their own proposals to WCIT 2012.
The report for WCIT 2012 is now in document 4 for this conference, and that contains three addenda.
Addenda one is a quite volumenous document and that is the completion of proposals with options for revisions to the ITRs. Addendum two contains the draft of the future ITRs, including A proposals and review of resolutions, recommendations and continues of the conference in 1988.
Addendum 3 contains the text of the regulations 1988 in the Arabic, Chinese and Russian versions with selected changes. I would like to point out in this connection that as a result of the work of the council working group, it was pointed out that the versions of the texts of the regulations of 1988 in the Arabic, Russian and Chinese languages were not agreed to the Drafting Committee of the 1988 conference. These versions were prepared after the conference. The group agreed that the text reflecting the drafting changes, if delegates agreed, were to be included in the addendum to the report. And that is, indeed, what has been done.
Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, at its session in 2012 council has discussed the Question of opening access to the draft of the future ITRs, and it was decided that an ITU Web Page would be set up and that this would be accessible from the 15th of August through to the 7th of November. During that time we received and published 28 comments. Furthermore, it was decided that 4800 accesses to the draft regulations had been made and I think the figures speak for themselves.
So the council Working Group in preparing for WCIT 2012 completed its work which it did on schedule and has submitted its final report to WCIT. It was submitted by the Secretary-General to this conference and is now published as I said in document number 4.
Thank you very much, Chairman.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much. And with that, the meeting can take note of this document.
And now we can go to agenda item 15, and DT 4. And before I start I just wanted to also put some clarifications for the meeting. Because it has been questions raised during coffee break, on the selected items that were put in DT 4. And I just want to repeat that DT 4 is a sub set of DT 1, to Claire if I any confusion. And -- to clarify any contusion fusion. The reason it was put there were because they were items to be considered by plenary. And this is either items that have serious disagreement between Member States that requires intervention of the plenary or items that they have majority agreements that can be agreed by plenary and move forward. And of course the issues regarding general principles that we will start with.
So these contributions were grouped into key issues, and we will start the first key issue, and that's general principles now; with DT 4. And the Member States' contribution, and I'll start with the CITA proposal. CITA, you have the floor to present general principles only. I have give the floor for CITA to present their proposal, and please I want to limit the presentation by three minutes.
CITA?
Sorry. I'll be specific in your contribution. Proposals 1, 2, 10 and 12 of your contribution.
That's related to general principles.
If you are not ready, we will go to Asia Pacific for the sake of time. Is that okay?
.
>> Mr. Chairman?
>> CHAIR: Yes?
>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The first document is the American proposal number 1. And if you give me just a second to bring it up in my computer, it's a proposal --
>> CHAIRPERSON: Just to --
>> It's a proposal to review and revise the --
>> CHAIRPERSON: Just to help the meeting. It's page 80 of DT 4.
.
>> At the WCIT 2012. The essence of this proposal, Mr. Chairman, the proposal presents a background on the WCIT, some principles that are embedded in resolution 171, but most importantly, Mr. Chairman, the proposal reflects the views of the region in regards to the enormous changes that have happened between 1988 and 2012, changes that are clearly reflected by the technological evolution and by the liberalization of markets worldwide.
It is the view reflected in this interAmerican proposal, Mr. Chairman, that what we require is not necessarily regulatory provisions but that regulatory environment that promotes competition, investment, and entrepreneurship and innovation.
Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, the proposal, the views of the region clearly articulate that establishing detailed regulatory provisions would be detrimental to achieving and maintaining the goals of a regulatory environment that has proven to be successful, one that promotes competition, investment, entrepreneurship and innovation.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> CHAIR: Thank you.
I'll take now Asia Pacific proposal. Page 82 for reference in DT 4.
I give now the floor to Asia Pacific.
>> Asia Pacific: --
>> CHAIR: India will present the Asia Pacific proposal.
>> INDIA: Mr. Chairman, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Actually, it's not the Asia Pacific proposal that we are presenting. India has made a separate submission. So I think there is a little bit of confusion here.
>> CHAIR: Okay. Then can you hold and try to find who is going to present the Asia Pacific proposal and then we will come to the Indian proposal.
>> INDIA: Okay.
>> CHAIR: I cannot see any flag of... Japan? Will you present the Asia Pacific proposal? Japan?
>> JAPAN: Yes, Chairman. I understand that now we are now dealing with the part -- the last part of the DT 4, right? And the ACP has principles there concerning the issues of -- for the -- over ITR revisions.
The first one is that whenever CCITT appears in the text, that should be replaced by ITU-T. The second one is whenever there is a member, it will represented by the Member State, and if there is a demonstration, that should be replaced by Member States, whether operating agencies, or -- we, in the APT we discussed these issues about this in the operating agencies. And there are divergent views concerning whether we should use the operating agencies or ROAs, and we come to some compromise that, to adopt the operating agencies with asterisks. It shows that if Member States prefer to use this, they can do that, and if they want to limit the scope of this application to the ROA, they can do that.
We would like to have -- to see this kind of flexibility in the operating agencies A with asterisks. And if you see the asterisks, maybe some people thinks that there needs to be some modification to make the more clear. But our intention is that accord ring to the -- according to each situation that the member -- of the Member States, that can be the scope can be just ROA, or operating agency, according to each country's case. This is the idea.
And having said that, I have to add that there are diver gent views among the AP countries. And we, Japan, believe that just the operating agencies, without any restriction is too broad.

>> CHAIR: Japan, I'm sorry to interrupt you. But we are not discussing OA or ROA right away. We will get to it. But if you have any comments on general principles, I would love to put it to the meeting. Otherwise, we will come to the ROA/OA proposal at a later stage.
>> JAPAN: Chairman, I thought that we are now at the end of the DT 4. And if you see this DT 4, there are three parts concerning these principles. But if it's not appropriate, I will stop here. Thank you very much.
>> CHAIR: Thank you, Japan.
We will take right now Canada and US proposal on general principles. So document 31. And I'll give the floor to whoever wants to take it. US or Canada. Thank you.
U.S. You have the floor.
>> UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Mr. Chairman, we have submitted document 31, which contains three of the principles for consideration at this plenary.
This document 31 seeks an agreement on the scope issues as they relate to the ITRs' classification of operating agencies or recognized operating agencies, as well as retaining the existing definition of telecommunications. Should we reach an agreement on these issues, we will bolster the likelihood of a successful outcome to the conference, and ensure there is consensus from the beginning of the conference on what will be the reach of the ITRs.
As a Member State, we prefer to know the impact of the proposals to revise the ITRs before we agree to those proposals. With a common understanding of the scope issues at the start of the conference, those issues will not have to be addressed and debated in the context of each Article.
The proposals concerning scope fall into one of three categories. First revision of the preamble and Article 1. Second, application of ITRs to operating agency, operating agencies, or some other category of entities. And finally, the definition of telecommunications. As a contribution States, the preamble and Article 1 set forth the principle and scope of the ITRs, and it is essential to agree on those fundamental issues before considering specific proposals to amend provisions of these ITRs.
In addition, WCIT-12 should agree whether the ITRs should apply to recognized operating agencies, operating agency, or some other category, and whether to revise the definition of telecommunications.
These are threshold issues that we believe will affect the scope and application of the ITRs as well as their relationship to the ITU constitution and Convention and we seek a conversation about these issues as early as possible.
Member States as positions on these issues will allow the conference to develop a common understanding of the impact of the proposals to revise the scope, in this way the implications will be clear to everyone as we advance on specific proposals.
I reserve the right later on to describe each of these three proposals in detail.
Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. And I think also we -- your proposal focusing on the ROA and OA issue and primarily on some of the definitions. But we will come to that soon, very soon.
I'll now give the flur to the European common procedure, and again focusing on the general principles.
So... Portugal. You have the floor.
>> PORTUGAL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon to all of you. Contribution 16 and its addendum 1 presents the European common proposals for WCIT-12. These were developed by the European confor instance of telecommunications Administrations in several meetings that took place throughout 20111 and 2012.
Europe recalls that one size fits all and proscriptive solutions are not advisable. In fact, the revised International Telecommunications Regulations are ekts expected to be applicable, helpful and meaningful in every region and country of the world.
This will not be achievable if is there an intention to micromanage the International telecommunication services as a positive position to a given country may be meaningless or even harmful to its neighbor.
Europe considers that WCIT shall find win/win solutions as the Secretary-General correctly said in his opening speech.
For that hand, Europe agreed on a set of criteria which, in our opinion, should guide the ITR revision. First, in accordance to this criteria, which have a legal basis and in our opinion are bald criteria, -- are balanced criteria, as an International treat Treaty, the ITR should address high level strategic policy issues related to international telecommunications services and facilities. The basis for this criteria is laid down in resolution 171, preparations for the 2012 World Conference on International Telecommunications, Guadalajara 2010.
Secondly, consistent with ITU-T -- with ITU constitution, and in particular the preamble and Article 1, Europe considers that ITU constitution does not prescribe that ITU-T recommendations are binding, and therefore the ITR's revision should not be used to change the nature of ITU recommendations.
Consistent with International agreements and legislation, adopted by CPT Members, under this criteria calls that the large number of Europe countries are EU, UAE members and also (inaudible) members. The same way that Europe respects different market landscapes and different regional and nationals, throughout the scope, we expect that the International agreements were made by a large number of -- respects the International agreement that were made by a large number of Members.
Third, Europe will consider proposals related to national defense, national content, and cybercrime issues in the context of results free of resolution 1 30, revised in Guadalajara 2010.
Finally, exclusionings of areas not related to the purpose and scope of the ITRs. Europe considers that proposals concerning national or regional telecommunications service or transport should not be included in the ITRs. The compliance with this criteria is also linked to the preambles of both the ITU constitution and the ITRs, which fully recognize the sovereign right of each state to regulate its telecommunications. Takening into consideration the above criteria, Europe estimated a number of proposals for amending each Article of the existing ITR and is also proposing a revision of appendix 2 of this Treaty
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. And now I open the floor for any comments. And before I forget, after -- South Africa is asking for the floor, but before giving South Africa the floor, India asked the Question, is it on general principles or do you want to comment on the general principles before giving the -- before giving South Africa the floor? India?
>> INDIA: Thank you, Chairman. Our contribution was not on the subject of general principle, so we will come in at the appropriate stage. Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. South Africa? You asked for the flo
So under general principles and the comments on the presentation of documents by the different groups, is there any comment from the meeting?
I see none and I can summarize the general principles here. As we did in terms of consultation with the regional groups and looking at proposals as well, I can say that the general principles that the way I can summarize it, the ITRs, the outcome of this conference and the ITRs shall contain high level guiding prince pels. I think there is an agreement on this -- principles. I think there is an agreement on this. And the ITRs should be technology neutral. And I think there is an agreement on this.
And there has to be -- the ITRs have to be consistent with the preamble and Article 1 of the constitution. And there is an agreement on this.
And the ITRs should belong lasting, without the need of frequent revision.
Would that -- if there is agreement that we move on general -- on these general principles for the conference, we can move right now -- there -- if there is an agreement we can move right now to the discussion of a more specific subject, which is ROA, OA.
Thank you very much.
So we will take a lot of these general principles, and I wanted to give the floor, we have Algeria on the general principles or the ROA/OA?
Algeria?
>> ALGERIA: Thank you, Chairman.
Chairman, which the Secretary-General took the floor he stressed and reminded the International community of the fact that the ITRs were established in 1988. 24 years ago at an administrative conference. And yet the title is very revealing. Since 1988, significant changes have occurred, revolutions we might say, radical change.
Radical change has marked the telecommunications context, letters compare the current -- let us compare the current situation. Looking at technology, looking at the difference between the situation in 1988 and that which we face in 2012, if we believe that the ITRs shouldn't reflect those radical changes, we might wonder what the role of this WCIT is.
It is important for us, for the International community of today and tomorrow that we understand what purpose should be given to this conference, this first conference of its kind, which is another thing we must stress.
If this conference, which is the first of its kind were not to tackle this radical change which has affected telecommunications and information technologies, future generations will fail to understand what our role in Dubai in 2012 was.
And we would not like to be judged by those future generations in that way. On the temporary, we must emerge from this conference with a sense that we have acquitted ourselves of our duties with the awareness that we have completed the line of work which involved updating those ITRs and bringing them in line with the current time and the progress which the telecommunications and information technology sector has undergone.
Chairman, I say this in my general principles, we're talking about general principles here. These regulations shouldn't talk about a particular type of technology. That's not what I'm saying, no. They should take into account the radical change which has affected telecommunications.
Thank you, Chairman.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. And when we said that these ITRs should contain high level principles, we talk about all the issues that were put on the table as contributions from Member States. So basically, we are saying the same thing. And it will be discussed during the course of the conference.
Now, we have full presentation from United States on the ROA/OA and I will come back to Japan and ACP proposal and I will give now the floor to Japan. Japan, you have three minutes because we need to have some discussions before the end of the meeting.
Japan, you have the floor.
>> JAPAN: Thank you, Chairman.
Now, I think it's the appropriate time to have some discussion concerning whether we should use these operating agencies or ROA issues. ROA. According to my understanding, the issue of the -- now, if we see the current text of ITR, the Administrations of my peers, these admin straition is a private recognized operating agencies. And now I understand this PROA is now ROA, as defined in the constitutions of this ITU.
And if I look -- we look at this constitution number 38, it says that the Member States have an obligation to impose the application described in this ITR to the operating agencies, which the Member States authorized to operate. And so we can see -- we can understand that when we talk about these obligations contained in ITR, maybe it's not appropriate to understand this obligation can be imposed to all the operating agencies. Maybe there should be some limitations concerning whether Member States will import these obligations to these operating agencies.
So I understand that maybe in the context of RO -- in the context, ROA is a better wording to replace this Administration with the private operating agencies. Private recognized operating agencies.
*
In the APT proposal, we had divergent views concerning of use of OA and ROA and we just presented as the APT proposal to say operating agencies asterisk, and allowing Member States to have some flexibility concerning the scope of ITR, and we have divided views. I'll stop here. Thank you very much.

>> CHAIR: Thank you. I'll give the floor to Sweden. Australia. Please be brief, because we are very close to the end of the day, working day.
I'll take Sweden first and then Australia.
>> SWEDEN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I asked for the floor in order to provide support for the proposals in document 31, which in our reading does not only deal with the Question of ROA and OA, it also deals with the general issue of the scope of the ITRs, and the definition of telecommunications. And we believe that is important and it has to be resolved before we discuss the matter of sub substance.
With record to the ROA or OAs, we are in favor of using the word recognized operating agencies, in order not to change the context and the application of the ITRs.
Thank y

>> CHAIR: Australia?
>> AUSTRALIA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Given the range and number of proposals that have been put forward to this conference, it's important that we decide on certain matters early in our discussion, otherwise we risk creating a situation where text that has been agreed for inclusion will later become unacceptable.
For this reason, Australia wishes to speak in support of the proposals put forward to this conference by the United States and Canada, specifically, Australia agrees that any revisions to the ITRs should be considered with full knowledge of whether they would apply to recognized operating agencies, operating agencies, or other entities.
Australia would refer to use the term recognized operating agencies to remain contis tent with the definitions in the current ITU constitution. This will provide clarity for subsequent discussions to know that we are talking about an entity that operates a public telecommunications network. We also agree that the definition of telecommunications should be consider ed before this conference moves to to discussing specific proposals to revise the ITRs.
Considering these underlying elements of the ITRs before moving on to other discussions is a sensible approach, which always Australia supports. Thank you.
>> CHAIR: I have three requests, and I want to stop the floor.
I have Brazil, Russia, UAE, and Portugal on the ROA/OA issue. And I would like to ask the interpreters if they can stay with us for ten minutes.
>> INTERPRETER: We will give you ten minutes, gentlemen, Chair.
>> CHAIR: Sorry, Argentina, that is the end of the list, Brazil, UA, Argentina, tlooes please be brief. CostaRica wants to have the floor. Brazil first.
>> BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Brazil supports -- the use of both terms. OA is not a new concept. It's established in the base instruments of the union. OAs more over are users and providers of International telecommunication services. They currently and due to convergence of market and technology shall providing important telecommunications services, and therefore must be covered by this Treaty.
But it's appearance has to be analyzed in-depth and in on case-by-case basis. As Europe, we don't think that one size fits all solution is advisable at this moment.
Brazil should like to enforce the concept of having OAs and ROA according to the views of each Article. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.
>> CHAIR: UAE, briefly.
>> UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: Thank you, Chairman. I will try to be very brief. First of all, the general principles, maybe we haven't submitted as proposal a document 7 Rev 1. But we have our principles and we have discussed it many times almost in line with the same that you have mentioned.
However, with regard to the ROA and OA, the Arab group also has submitted their proposals. In regard to this one, we have supporting that to cover OA instead of ROA, in the ITR and the reason for that one if we go to the definitions of the ROA, it has to have two things, which is the head Office of this company and the country will provide service or authorized by a Member States to provide the services.
And ROA always we are thinking that it is recognized by one country but it's not really recognized by other countries. houvsh, the operating agency, it is covered both.
Mr. Chair man, I graev with all, that these are important issues and they are reflected in all ITRs, and we have to find a way how we can proceed further with this one. And I'm sure that you have a solution on this issue and I'll be happy to explain our position.
Thank you very much.
>> CHAIR: thank.
Russia.
>> Russia: I'd like to thank that I'm speaking on behalf of the RCC. In our proposals we have suggested the use of the term agency, which we prefer to retain, because many developing countries, including Member States of the RSS continue to have agencies playing a very important role in the area of communications within the framework of their organisation.
We also believe that the use of the term operating agency as a general understanding, a general definition, would include state and private organisations, and that brings our proposal I think closer to the proposal made by our colleagues from the Arab countries.
In these two points, if you bring them together, in the text of the ITUs, we will be using roughly the construction Administration/operating agency.
Now, as far as document 31 is concerned, it is of course extremely interesting, although having said that we would like to return to our understanding if we might be able to do so later, as I think suggested by the USA. Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Portugal, please, briefly.
>> PORTUGAL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'll be brief.
First of all, we would like to support the methods described in contribution 31. We think -- Europe thinks that it's important to generally agree in the scope of the ITRs and on crucial matters, such as ROA, OA issue, as well as the telecommunication definition before we proceed to the remaining provisions.
In relation to the ROA/OA issue, Europe has run a legal analysis on this Question. And as a conclusion, we noted that Article 1, 1 A of the ITRs says that the ITRs establish general principles, which relate to the provision and operation of International telecommunication service offered to the public, and I underline the word "Public."
And in line with this, the definition which better suits for the purpose of the ITRs is, in our opinion, the recognized operating agents. Thank you very much.
>> CHAIR: Thank you, Argentina, please brief. We have to close the meeting.
>> ARGENTINA: Thank you very much, Chairman. I will indeed try and be brief. I simply wanted to make the point that we agree with the methodology which is proposed in document number 31. We think we need to reach agreement on the fundamental principles before we actually embark upon the rest of our discussions.
Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Costa Rica, please brief as well.
>> COSTA RICA: Yes, Chairman, thank you very much. Like the delegation of Argentina we want to offer our support to the proposal made in document 31 and introduced by the United States. We believe that it's essential that we sort this out before we make any further progress and move on to consider all the other specific proposals relating to the ITRs.
First of all, we have to have this matter sorted out. And therefore Costa Rica also believes that recognized operating agency is probably the most appropriate definition.
Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. I have closed the list. Philippines and Brazil, for the is a sake of time. So I will really ask you to bear with me.
With the issues at hand, this is one of the issues that was seen from the contribution that it will have a serious disagreement. I hope we will agree at end of the day.
I propose that an informal discussion takes place and I suggest that I will lead this discussion and I will ask the regional representatives to be with me tomorrow at 8 o'clock, in a meeting that we will get right now, to discuss this fundamental issue before us on the conference.
If you are in agreement with this, then we will have this discussion in an informal meeting, chaired by the Chairman of the conference, starting from tomorrow at 8, before the plenary.
I see still Philippines and Spain are asking for the floor. And Mexico.
And we are running out of time. We have four minutes before the interpreters... Philippines? I'll give the flar to the Philippines and then Spain.
>> PHILIPPINES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Philippines would like to express its positions on the various issues raised, particularly on the term "Operating agency", "Recognized operating agency, Member State and Administration."
It is our position that these terms may be used interchangeably, but within the context of a provision these different words may, in fact, have different meanings.
So we also are amplifying the position of the AP community, we say that the term "Administration" when it refers to a provision in the ITR, which in fact refers to the state as parties to the seing in atory or a party by ak seing, then the term Administration must be replaced by the word Member State. Because in the Treaty, it is the Member State which has the obligations, where the Administration only has operational obligations.
>> CHAIR: Philippines, I'm sorry, I hate to interrupt you. But we are -- we have two minutes. And if you can join us in the informal meeting and discuss this, this critical issue, I would really appreciate it.
We have to close the meeting in two minutes.
>> PHILIPPINES: We will. Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. With that, I see no objection on establishing an informal meeting. And I really need the representative from the regional groups and Philippines and we will have that discussion tomorrow morning at 8 o'clock. I will announce the meeting soon.
With that, we are coming to the last agenda item that is other business.
Is there any other business?
.
>> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a few announcements. Ass with previously mentioned, the first meeting of the Steering Committee will take place immediately at the end of this session. And that meeting will take place in room B.
I'd also like to just say a brief word about document distribution. In line with ITU's commitment to reduce its carbon footprint and in accordance with the plenipotentiary recommendations and practice, the conference will work as far as practicable in a paperless manner. And so in that regard, Mr. Chairman, we will be limiting document distribution to two sets per delegation and that will be on request.
Also, Mr. Chairman, we have made available an application which is called SYNC. You can get that from the ITU website and the I encourage you to download it and you will have access to all of the documents and then you just need to update it each day.
Also, we have made available a number of laptops for those delegates that were not able to come with their laptops. So please contact a member of the ITU Secretariat. We have a number of colleagues in the back of the room, wearing blue ITU caps, should you need any technical assistance. And then finally, Mr. Chairman, we are piloting a mobile Web app for this event. It's a new feature for ITU conferences and I welcome delegates to try out the app. And if you have comments, please share them with the Secretariat. Thank you very much.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. And I think there is a social event today. UAE you can announce that.
>> UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: Thank you. In order to invite all delegates to a dinner, which will be in the Jumara beach hotel. The buses will start moving from here at 6:30. So I'd like to request everybody to take the buses, which will be at the registration area, at 6:30. And please enjoy yourselves there and bring your family also. So I would like to see you there at 7:30 we will be available.
Thank you very much.
(Applause)

>> CHAIR: The informal meeting is L in room E at 8 o'clock. Mexico is asking for the floor. Are you insisting on on taking the floor? Mexico?

>> MEXICO: Yes, Chairman thank you very much. I just wanted to ask if Mexico could be included in this informal group, since I think you had requested the presence of the regional presenttives. We -- representatives. We think this is a very important point and we would like to be present and I'd like some clarification if possible on the scope of these discussions.
That way we can be absolutely clear about the specific issues that are going to be dealt with. Thank you.
>> CHAIR: Thank you. You are welcome to join the meeting.
With that, I will close... United Arab Emirates? Do you still -- UAE?
>> UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: Sorry, Chairman. But because I have to say it, this social event it's sponsored by our telecom operator. If I will not say that, they will not be happy with me. So I have to say it here.
(Applause)

>> CHAIR: Thank you. The meeting is adjourned, and I'll see you tomorrow at 9:30 for the plenary and for the informal meeting at 8, in room E. Thank you.
(End of meeting,

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/transcript-of-the-plenary-1-wcit-12

Transcript of the Opening Ceremony, WCIT-2012

snehashish — 2012-12-03T13:57:52Z

Rough live-transcript of the Opening Ceremony of the World Conference on International Telecommunications, 2012 (WCIT-12) held on December 3, 2012.

World Conference on International Telecommunications
Dubai United Arab Emirates
Opening ceremony
03 December 2012
11:00

Excellencies. Ladies and gentlemen. I request you to take your seats. The conference will begin in a few moments. You will need to use your headsets as this is a silent meeting.
There will be simultaneous interpretations in the six languages of the United Nations. On channel 1 you will find English. French 2. Spanish on channel 3. Russian on channel 4. Chinese on channel 5. And Arabic on channel 6.
For any assistance with WiFi connections, please feel free to call upon the staff wearing blue caps.
The ITU staff of koshs is available to assist you in any other matters.
We will begin very shortly. Please take your seats. Thank you.

(Please stand by. The meeting will begin momentarily)

.
>> Ladies and gentlemen. Would you please be up standing for the national anthem.
Thank you.
(Music) (Applause)
Honorable Ministers, excellency, ladies and gentlemen. On behalf of the ITU oying and the telecommunications regulatory authority of the United Arab Emirates, it is my great pleasure too welcome you here today to the World Conference on International Telecommunications, here at the World Trade Center in the wonderful City of Dubai. We have almost 2000 delegates assembled here, from 160 of the 1934 Member States, of the -- 193 Member States of the ITU. Many old and new friends from NGO, and the general public, you are all truly very welcome.
Over the preceding months, the world has expressed a great interest in the outcomes of this conference.
its collective eyes and ears are focusing a tentatively on us, but I feel very confident that we will not disappoint them.
The United Nations Secretary-General, Mr. bn can I moon, has shown a particular interest in the outcomes of this conference, and we are honored today to commence this opening ceremony with an address which we will share with you now.
Thank you.

>> BAN-KI MOON: Excellencies. Secretary-General Toure', Distinguished Delegates, ladies and gentlemen.
I'm pleased to address the ITU World Conference on International Telecommunications. I thank the United Arab Emirates for hosting.
Information and communications technologies are transforming our world, opening doors, educating, and empowering people, saving lives. The Arab Spring showed the power of ICT to help people voice their legitimate demands for human rights and greater accountability.
As we strive to achieve Millennium Development Goals and shape the post 2015 development agenda, expanding the benefits of ICTs will be crucial.
In the coming days, you will review the agreement that underpins how we communicate with each other across the globe.
Our over all objective must be to ensure universal access to information and communication technology, including for the two-thirds of the world's population currently not online.
A digital divide has no place in the information age, and 21st Century knowledge economy.
The management of information and communication technology should be transparent, Democratic, and inclusive. I'm great fied that you have -- I'm gratified that you have taken steps to open the process, including the vital voices of society and the -- civil society and the private sector. The U naitions systems hand between an open Internet. The right to communicate is essential to the ITU U Commission, the of declaration of human rights guarantees freedom of expression across all media and all frontiers. As a World Summit on Information Society, the free flow of information and ideas is essential for peace, development, human rights, and our common progress.
These freedoms are ind Spes sabl. We must continue to work together and find consensus on how to effectively keep cyberspace open, accessible, affordable and secure for all. I trust that together Governments, industry and civil society will rise to this occasion.
I wish you a successful conference.
(Applause)
. I would like to thank Mr. Ban-Ki moon in his absence for his message.
The United Arab Emirates has been a very generous host firstly WTSA which concluded last week and now to this WCIT. I want to invite the Director General of the regulatory authority to give an address on behalf of the United Arab Emirates.
(Applause)
.
>> In the name of God, the merciful and compassionate doctor Hamadoun I. Toure', Secretary-General of the ITU, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, please be upon you in God's mercy and blessings.
It is an honor for me to welcome you to the World Conference on International Telecommunications. We are very proud to be able to welcome you here in the Middle East especially in Dubai. The United Arab Emirates have always been very honored to host such events. We would like to mention the fact that we hosted ITU Telecom World 2012 in October. And we hosted the world telecommunications standardization Assembly and now we are meeting for the World Conference on International Telecommunications.
We are very grateful for the trust that the ITU has demonstrated in us. The United Arab Emirates throughout its history has always been a living example of coexistence between different cultures and races. And from the ideal destination to embrace everyone without exception.
The foundations of the union were laid by late His Highness sheikh p Zayed bin Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Nahyan. He solved a great men issues in the interests of all. This conference was held at a timeline line when we are celebrating the 41st anniversary of our be loved country. We celebrate this under the spirit of our father, the late sheikh. The spirit which establishes our close ties and enable unity and solidarity and reflected spaes and love in our relations with the world and we hope this spirit will prevail in the work of this conference. We aspire today that the same spirit of oush union will facilitate the work of the world conference of the International Telecommunication Union and contribute as much as possible to play the role of consensus between the parties.
The UAE was among the first countries in the region and in the world investing in extensively in ICTs. We would like to provide the best possible services in this area, and we believe that the time has come today to take opportunities before us to ensure that we build a sound knowledge based economy.
We organized a forum on Next Generation Networks in order to accelerate the process of turning the telecommunications sector in the country into a very solid sector and to improve the communications systems and provide enterprises with the next-generation technology.
In this context and in support of the development plans for the state to support the knowledge based economy, it was announced by His Highness, sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid, Vice President and prime Minister and ruler of Dubai to further develop intelligent networks which will depend on the technical skills to acquire knowledge and exchange information using fourth generation networks based on IP, which represents backbone of the initiative. Ladies and gentlemen, we would like to share with you that according -- this recording that we are -- that this conference is being held, where the last conference was held in 1988, in Melbourne, Australia.
So this conference will be a new starting point to redefine our responsibilities and all the people of the world are looking at what we are doing today. Governments, service providers, and users, and we must rise to this challenge and assume our responsibilities.
Ministers, decision makers, and experts have all come together here to discuss the most important ICT issues, which are the very backbone and life blood of the world economy.
This will enable us to build on our achievements so far. The United Arab Emirates are hosting this conference as a stakeholder in this development. And I would like to welcome you yet again to our country.
I hope we will be able to make this into a better world with the tools at our disposal. And I hope that society will not be disappointed. I hope the global community will not be disappointed in us.
I hope we are successful in our work to further prosperity and well being for our people.
Thank you.
(Applause)

>> I now call about Mr. Fadi Chehade', President and CEO of the ICANN to address the delegates. His presence embodies the multi-stakeholder spirit of greater collaboration and coordination between ITU and ICANN and of the Internet ecosystem in general. We really thank him for accepting the Secretary-General's invitation as well as the UAE invitations to join us here today. Mr. Fadi Chehade', please.
(Applause)

>> FADI CHEHADE; Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mohammed Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Nahyan. Dr. Toure', excellencies, Minister, and heads of delegations. Ladies and gentlemen. I am deeply honored to address your distinguished conference today.
Responding to a truly most gracious invitation from Mr. Mohammed the Chairman of the conference, and the ITU Secretary-General, doctor Hamadoun I. Toure'. Thank you.
I sincerely thank both of them on behalf of myself and Dr. Steve Crocker, Chairman of the board of ICANN, who is here with us today, for their invitation to this historic opening ceremony.
I am here because I believe in the power of engagement.
Engagement starts with listening and I'm here for that.
It's a new season of engagement at ICANN and it's a new season of cooperation between ICANN and the ITU, which started recently at a meeting with Dr. Toure' at the IGF in Baku.
I recognize the ITU's deep impact on the development of the telecommunications industry and the broadband infrastructure of which we all benefit every day. Especially in the developing world, the world I come from.
The ITU and ICANN have complementary roles, and moving forward we shall cooperate in good spirit while clearly respecting our distinct roles. I therefore join my fellow organisations, the ISOC, the IETF, the regional Internet registries in our continued deep commitment to service the world's needs for Internet governance.
Allow me to address you now in my mother tongue, Arabic.
When we initiated cooperation with colleagues and brothers in the Arab world, I was delighted to meet the leaders of the Arab delegations here. It was a very fruitful meeting. And we committed ourselves to a period of cooperation and coordination on my own name and on behalf of ICANN. I would like to thank you all for that cooperative spirit, which is extremely positive and I should, too, like to take this opportunity to express my satisfaction and pride to see such an important conference being held in an Arab country, this brother country, the UAE. It is certainly a matter for great pride for all of those of us working in ICTs.
I thank the following. When I started at ICANN, I said we can build organisations either as fortresses or as Oasis.
I invite you to join me in making our organisations open Oasis. The Oasis is welcoming. It's open, it's vital. And that's what I intend to do. Remove the walls. Open the Windows. So that we can all participate together in building organisations that are welcoming, that are transparent, and I'm committed to that in front of all of you.
I wish you the best with your conference. Thank you.
(Applause)
.
>> And thank you to Mr. Fadi Chehade' for sharing his wishes of transparency and working together for the success of the conference.
On this very special time as we celebrate the 41st anniversary of the union of the Arab Emirates, let's take a few minutes to learn something about the history of the union.
Thank you.
(Video)
On December 2, 1971, the trution States gave way to the knewly born United Arab Emirates. Meeting in what was known as the guest palace, the rulers of abby, Dubai, Shaza, Umar quand and Suzara established the independent state of the UEA.
Ras Alqimi joined in February of the following year. Ruler of abda be was elected President of this new country.
Sheikh rach shid been Zayed Maktoum ruler of Dubai was appointed as the UAE's first Vice President and Minister. Together the dignitaries and guests gathered under the world's newest national flag. Today union house stands as a reminder of this successful federation shall with a much larger national flag now flying over this historic landmark.
Looking back, it's amazing how far the United Arab Emirates have progressed in such a short space of time.
It began with pearls. The perl industry was a major source of income for communities on the Arabian peninsula. Tribes men would migrate to the coast during the perling season to work on the fleets putting to sea. The perling Dows would spend many weeks and months gathering oyster s from the sea bed. The industry collapsed in the 19 30 due to the artificial pearls. Coastal communities dependent on fishesing and perling had to find new sources of income. It was shortly after this that the first air links to the region were established. Shaza became a stop over for aircraft enrule from GB, India and on to Australia. Passengers stayed overnight in the Almahada for the. It was practical. Necessary to protect against occasional raids by Bedoinn. Today the site is an aviation museum, displaying aircraft that served the region.
And Shaja has grown from its humble beginnings into a major city. (Sharjah)

These oorj dusty air Industrial Properties evolved into gleaming modern airports, linking the UAE to every major city in the world. Oil was discovered in commercial quantityness 19 58. Development of this abundant resource begin shortly thereafter, 196 2 the SO Dublin loaded the first cargo of crude oil.
In addition to exporting oil, the need to be self sufficient led to the opening of the Ruas oil refinery. On shore and offshore oil production continued to develop throughout the 1960 s.
The oil wealth was put to use improving infrastructure. The City of Abu Dhabi embarked on a wave of construction that saw the island's shoreline dramatically change.
The city's oldest building, Al Hausin or the white forth elected in 1798 was the most prominent landmark in the city. Today the Fort now undergoing restoration is surrounded by the sky scrapers of Abu Dhabi. The city is still growing, worthy of its place among the world's capitals.
With pearls now no longer able to supply vital income, the resilient City of Dubai turned to trade to restore its fortunes. It became a base for commerce throughout the Gulf region. The Dubai creek, tradition assistive technology alley the centre of business was dredged in the early 1960 s to allow larger Dows to navigate the water way. This allowed the city to continue to grow as an important commercial hub. Dows laden did goods are still seen, and an historical link between the old and new. Increasing demand led to the world's largest manmade port ceeing created. The docks are testament to the value role it now plays at centre of regional trade. These successful commercial links brought great change to the City of Dubai. Once crowded narrow alleyways, hardly wide enough to accommodate cam pels and donkeys have turned into highways. And there are record breaking sky scapeers and developments that are the Icons of the city.
In land, in the em RIT of abda by lies the oasis of Laine. It was the base for the p Omani skouts who set out on camel to police the area. They were based at Al Jehili forth which was used as sheikh Zayed the first. Surrounding the forth, the Houses were made from mud brick or palm fronds. Today the forth stands restored and is a popular tourist attraction.
The modern City of Alain and surrounding district expanded to be home to over 380,000 people.
Throughout the country, constant reminders of these links with the past can be found sitting side by side with modern wonders.
Practical has given way to recreational. Forts stand restored as museums. Construction methods have changed. Some things, however, remain the same.
The people of the UAE still remember and honor their past as they move into the future. A reminder of how much has been achieved in such a short space of time.
(Applause) vrnlts Honorable Ministers, excellency, ladies and gentlemen. It is as always a very great pleasure for me to invite the gentleman hose untiring energy has brought us all here together today, the International Telecommunication Union Secretary-General, Dr. Hamadoun I. Toure', to give his inAugust url speech. Dr. Toure, please.
(Applause)

>> HAMADOUN TOURE': Thank you. Request morning to you all.
Excellencies, my dear brother, Mohamed Nasser Al-Ghanum, distinguished Ministers, delegates, my colleagues, elected officials of the union, the Secretary-General Houlin Zhao, directors. Director of Ability, Mr. Brahima Sanou, Director of TSB Mr. Malcolm Johnson, ladies and gentlemen.
What a great history we have seen here today. I would like to congratulate our host for all they have achieved in this 41 years of great history. Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests, welcome to the official opening of the World Conference on International Telecommunications, WCIT 12. We are very grateful to be here in Dubai and I would like to thank the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of United Arab Emirates for the tremendous facilities and efficient staff and support that they have provided to us.
Dubai is one of the most modern cities in the world, a city which has grown to become a wonderful symbol of Emirati culture and progress and a city which can rightly claim to be one of the greatest symbols of human achievement in the modern world.
So let me congratulate the United Arab Emirates on the 41st anniversary, yesterday, on its foundation on 2 December 1971.
Let me take the opportunity to again thank my good friend Fadi Chehade', President and CEO of ICANN, and Dr. Steve Crocker, Chairman of ICANN, who have accepted my invitation to come here. I have invited Fadi to recognize here the impact of ICANN on the development of Internet, and I've said this, this morning in our heads of delegations meeting that I believe we should be reaching out and them accepting here means that they are on the same road. I think if you help us, we can walk the talk and I believe I can count on you and the words that I received when I heard of the acceptance of Fadi Chehade' to this meeting was a testimony of everyone here, believing that it's time to start working together to be complementary and to work together. And I believe we have started the first step of that.
And I would like to count on you here to help us continue in that direction.
I believe it's the right direction. I believe it's the direction that will help us achieve great things for the humanity. The users out there in the world are not waiting for fights among us here. They are looking for results, so that we can help them be together in this knowledge society that we are all dreaming of.
On that note, I would like to take the opportunity to thank my good friend Minister and Senateter Steven conRoy, Minister of Telecommunications in Australia for his presence. Why I'm sing blink out Senator Conroy not only because of the achievement he made in his country, not only because of his contribution to the broadband Commission for the Internet development, but also balls Melbourne was the place for the last conference of the nature. 1988.
I would like to tell Senator Conway that the Melbourne conference has served its purpose. Thanks to the ITRs in 1988, the stage was set. The foundations were laid for the information society we are in today. Because thanks to the ITRs in 1988, the deregulation, privatization, competition, and innovation and growth that came in the 1990 s, ways were founded, and therefore I would like to thank Australia for being the host of such a big conference. This event, the WCIT 12 will bring to a close a most important year, ladies and gentlemen, for ITU. A year which has proved that consensus is the very foundation of harmony. It was a year we started with the world conference in Geneva, an event which achieved consensus on issues vital to the continued advancement of the global ICT sector.
And it was a year which just last week wrapped up in the world telecommunications standardization Assembly here in this room, an event which also successfully demonstrated the true might and power of consensus.
WCIT 12 as the resulting today will fulfill the promise not just of this year but of the entire century and a half of consensus building which makes ITU's history so unique.
Distinguished Delegates, we are here to explore the best ways to ensure that all the world's people can benefit from affordable, equitable access to ICTs.
I will take more time this afternoon of course to discuss this in more detail. But let me just list a few of the most important subjects for discussion where I can see in the proposals made that it is a great promise of being able to achieve compromise based on those proposals made here.
It includes broadband investment, we need to make sure that there is enough investment in the infrastructure to carry the traffic that we see that is going on -- growing in an expo nen shal way, voice, video and data, including the Internet.
Energy efficiency, accessibility, security, how the consequences of unsolicited content, misuse of numbering, roaming, reducing taxtation, how can this industry continue to be heavily taxed while it's the basis for all other industries in times of economic crisis?
Price transparency, the fostering of competitive, and Freedom of Expression that has been mentioned that was a risk of blocking the Freedom of Expression. So we made sure that we are addressing this issue in the very beginning of this conference * so that everyone understands that nothing can stop Freedom of Expression in this world today.
And nothing in this conference will be about that. On the contrary, what we do today here in this conference will enable the access to those people who want to express their Freedom of Expression.
Ladies and gentlemen, what you will notice in this list is that I have not mentioned one thing. Controlling the Internet. I did not mention that. Indeed, we have heard this morning from the President and CEO of ICANN, Fadi Chehade', who was invited as a special guest, along with the Chairman of the board. And I'm pleased that they are here so that we can start working together.
I'm very pleased to see that all stakeholders are very represented here with national delegations comprising representatives from Government, industry, and civil society as well as technical and legal experts and others, making this a fully inclusive conference.
Distinguished Delegates, this is a historic occasion and it is a hisser Rick opportunity asthma hat ma Gandhi said, the future depends on what you do today."
Gandhi also said you must be the change you want to see in the world."
In our debates and deliberations here in Dubai, let us remember the opening words of the charter of the United Nations. "We the people of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the Scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorry to mankind. And to these ends, to practice tolerance and to live together in peace with one another as good neighbors and to unite our strength to maintain peace and security."
And we heard from Ban-Ki Moon, whose work is to ensure that there is peace and stability in this world. We share our desire for security, for our society. Peace for all peoples of the world and prosperity for our children and future generations.
Everyone here has a vital role to play. The Member State delegations include representatives of all stakeholders. There are some very large delegations here and some very small ones. To those smaller delegation, let me remind you of an old African proverb. "If you think you are too small to make a difference, then you have never spent a night with a Mosquito:"
Ladies and gentlemen, this is the most important two weeks in the history of IC it is and it's time for us to work together and we can. Over the past six years, as Secretary-General of ITU, I have had the chance, the privilege, to travel widely across the globe. I have visited countries large and small and I have visited countries rich and poor, and everywhere, everywhere I have traveled, I've dishavediscovered that we all share the same hopes, dreams and aspirations. We are united, wherever we are, wherever we were born or whenever we came from, by a desire for progress. We want to grow. We want to develop. We want to innovate. To aspire to a better life for ourselves, certainly, but even more so for our children and our children's children.
And someone like me, who is lucky to be a grandfather can dream more, better, than the good life for my grandchildren.
We plant the tiny seeds that will grow into mighty trees. We look up to the stores. When you see, you know, there is a saying when you see a blutful flower up there, the roots of the tree are in the mud. * someone needs to do the work. And this has loads of progress and it's part of what makes us human. So Distinguished Delegates, we are here in did you boy to chart the course toward a better future. We are incredibly fortunate to have such a great membership bringing together great minds to a great meeting. We are also incredibly fortunate to be working in a sector, the information and technology sector that does so much to improve the lives of people across the world and which drives sustainable social and economic development. It is true, in the 21st Century, access to communication and information is ee vengs and invaluable. And this is true in the developed world and it is true in the developing world as well. I traveled to some of the world's most underserved countries and I have seen what ICTs really mean for the lives of those who have so little and the opportunities it can create for their children and for future generations. ICTs give people the power to totally transform their lives through education, healthcare and everything else on the online world we can deliver.
We have linked access bing broadband to Millennium Development Goals, to sustainable growth. ICTs also deliver a clear macro and microeconomic benefits. The at the macro economic level, we know that increasing mobile Tele dense see leads to additional GDP growth. This is even more true for increases in broadband penetration which deliver a multiplier effect. We have seen the difference of what can be made by mobile banking N and to the lives of people in southern India, where profits rose by 8 percent and consumer prices fell by 4 percent on average once the fishermen had mobile phones. When you transform individuals, you also transform whole societies and whole economies. *
75 years ago, during the second Inaugural address, President Franklin D. Roosevelt put it very wisely when he said "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Ladies and gentlemen, I look forward to the successful outcome of this conference in 12 days' time. I look forward to knowing that we have done the right thing and created an enduring framework to ensure that all the world's people have access to ICTs.
lastz week, I made the statement when the telecommunications mobile infrastructure and Internet work were cut off in Syria. I condemd those actions. I demanded that the Government restore those back immediately. For some of the opponents of this conference, I received from some of them, I received a nice, for the first time, a nice note saying Hamadoun thanks for saying what you said about the Internet. They ignored what I said about the telecommunication and the mobile infrastructure. It was a nice gesture from them, their side, to understand that we are worried about that. I did the same message a year ago when it happened in Egypt. And four years ago, when it happened in Myanmar. I was first to do that.
But what's -- what they have not noted is the fact that there was -- in Syria, the mobile penetration was close to 70 percent. sbu but the Internet penetration is 20 percent. For the 80 percent of the people in Syria, Internet was not cut off because it was simply not there. And tutors of the Hugh -- two-thirds of the human population don't have access to the Internet. And that access, the people here are involved in ensuring that we have that access. That's what this conference is about.
Thank you.
(Applause)

Ladies and gentlemen, I look forward to sharing with you that in the knowledge that we can hold our heads up high for the future generations. Distinguished Delegates, I firmly believe that there are three keys to the success of this conference. They are: Consensus. Consensus. And consensus.
Just last month, I was reminded that while elections are by definition win-lose successful negotiations are always win-win. And that's what this conference is about. Win-win. In the true tradition of ITU. I look forward to seeing how the spirit of consensus, the spirit of compromise and the spirit of multi-stakeholderism will come together to deliver that win-win solution. And I'm confident that each one of us here will do our best to ensure security for our soy site, peace for all nations and prosperity for our children and future generations. Let me close with a quote from Mandella. The time for the healing of wounds has come. The moment to bridge the chasms that divide us has come. The time to build is upon us."
Indeed, the time to build is upon us. We shall succeed.
I thank you very much.
(Applause)
.
>> Thank you very much for that uplifting speech. Our final presentation today will bring to the forefront the global advances made possible by the ICT industry. I hope you enjoy this presentation. Thank you.
(Video) information and communications has come a long way since the first message sent over the Atlanta in 1844 by Sam sul Morris. The need to be in constant touch with our family, colleagues and friends and business associates across the globe has accelerated technology development.
The digital revolution has made the telephone, Internet and social networking an integral part of modern life. Today 86 percent of the global population uses mobile phones. It's interesting that developing countries are fueling the drive for this uptake. There are more than 1.1 billion mobile broadband subscribers now. One-third of the world's population is online. That's a staggering 2.3 billion people. 45 percent of them are below the age of 25. What turns me on about the digital age is that you have closed the gap between dreaming and doing. Bono of YouTube said that, information and communications technology, ICT, helps individuals and organisations at different levels. In fact, ICT has purveyeded all facets of our personal and business life. For starters, it keeps us connected. ICT enables effortless exchange of ideas. It facilitates learning at one's own pace, place and time. Networking is yet another benefit. It makes shopping and eCommerce possible. Travel is easier than ever before. Entertainment is virtually at your finger tips. Businesses are able to function more efficiently and profitably, fueled by timely information.
Even fields such as healthcare, banking, security, transportation, and echo conservation have benefited from ICT. The UAE has always been an early adapter of technology. It has built a vibrant communications environment by providing infrastructure, competitive service providers, and set up a regulatory authority, the TRA, since 2003.
The UAE currently has 2 million fixed lines and that figure is increasing. Mobile subscriptions total 13 million subscribers. Information and communications technology, ICT, has played an important part of the average growth and development. The United Arab Emirates is proud to be Heralding in the information and communications realm. Why we're bringing the world together, to define the future of ICT in the last quarter of 2012.
Welcome to the future! Welcome to the UAE. Welcome to Telecom World Dubai. 2010.
(Applause).
>> Honorable Ministers, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, the opening ceremony is coming to a close. Before taking leave, I would like to remind the press that there is a press conference at 12:30 in room D. That is room D for Dubai. At 2:30 we will invite everyone back to this room for the first plenary session. And finally, we look forward to seeing you all this evening at Jumar beach hotel for the welcoming reception. Honorable Minister, excellency, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the ITU and TRA, I would like to wish you all a very successful conference.
Thank you ever.
(Applause)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/transcript-of-the-opening-ceremony-wcit-2012

Trans Pacific Partnership and Digital 2 Dozen: Implications for Data Protection and Digital Privacy

Shubhangi Heda — 2016-07-12T07:56:24Z

In this essay, Shubhangi Heda explores the concerns related to data protection and digital privacy under the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement signed recently between United States of America and eleven countries located around the pacific ocean region, across South America, Australia, and Asia. TPP is a free trade agreement (FTA) that emphasises, among other things, the need for liberalising global digital economy. The essay also analyses the critical document titled ‘Digital 2 Dozen’ (D2D), which compiles the key action items within TPP addressing liberalisation of digital economy, and sets up the relevant goals for the member nations.

1. Introduction

2. Analysis of TPP and D2D

2.1. Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)

2.2. Digital 2 Dozen (D2D)

3. Major Criticisms of the Digital Agenda of TPP

3.1. Data Protection

3.2. Digital Privacy

4. Implications of TPP for RCEP

5. Implications of TPP in the Context of EU Safe Harbour Judgement

6. Implications of TPP for India after US-India Cyber Relationship Agreement

7. Conclusion

8. Endnotes

9. Author Profile

1. Introduction

This essay explores the concerns related to data protection and digital privacy under the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement signed recently between United States of America and eleven countries located around the pacific ocean region, across South America, Australia, and Asia [1]. TPP is a free trade agreement (FTA) that emphasises, among other things, the need for liberalising global digital economy. The essay also analyses the critical document titled ‘Digital 2 Dozen’ (D2D), which compiles the key action items within TPP addressing liberalisation of digital economy, and sets up the relevant goals for the member nations. TPP requires the member countries to facilitate unhindered digital data flow across nations, for commercial and governmental purposes, which evidently have major implications for national and regional data protection and privacy regimes. These implications must also be seen in the context the recent judgement by the EU Court of Justice against the validity of the EU-USA data transfer agreement of 2000. Further, the essay discusses the potential impacts that TPP/D2D might have on India, in the context of the ongoing USA-India Cyber Relationship dialogue. If the privacy concerns are not raised right now TPP might act as a model framework for future FTAs which will fail to encompass proper data protection and digital privacy regime within it.

2. Analysis of TPP and D2D

2.1. Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)

Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a large multi-partner free trade agreement amongst twelve Asia-Pacific countries, which is closely led by geo-political and economic strategies of the USA. Countries started the negotiation of TPP in 2008 when USA joined Pacific Four (P-4) negotiations and in 2015 negotiations of TPP was concluded and text was released. Ministers from the member countries signed the agreement on February 4, 2016 [2]. The main aim of TPP is to liberalise trade and investment beyond what is provided for within the WTO. It is also considered to be a strategic move by the US to counter the trade linkages that are being established in the Asian region. TPP largely covers topics of market access, and rules on various related issues such as intellectual property rights, labour laws, and environment standards [3].

Between 1992 -2012 there has been an upsurge in bilateral trade agreements being signed in Asia from 25 to 103 and the effect of these FTAs is called the ‘noodle bowl effect’. TPP is seen as framework which will replace these FTAs which are causing the ‘noodle bowl effect’.While these FTAs are being replaced but with TPP being signed there are various bilateral arrangements signed along with TPP. USA has also stated that TPP will not affect the already existing NAFTA [4]. While TPP is being concluded there is another free trade agreement being negotiated between USA and EU , which is Trans Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Both TPP and TTIP and are considered to be serving similar objective which is to deal with new and modern trade issues. Also both the agreements are US led and since negotiation for TPP are now finalised it may have a significant impact on TTIP [5].

TPP is one of the first document which deals specifically with digital economy and applies across borders. The main aims of TPP are to promote free flow of data across borders without data localisation. It aims to remove national clouts and regional internets. It also includes provisions to combat theft of trade secrets. It allows you to create transparent regulatory process with inputs from various stakeholders. It also aims to provide access to tools and procedures for conduct of e-commerce [6].

Some of the major criticism to TPP were regarding the issues related to [7]:

environment, wherein it does not address the issue of climate change and the language used in the agreement is very weak;
labour rights provision mandates parties to adhere to the ILO provision but it does not seem to provide for effective framework and might not bring the desired change;
investment chapter is seen to be controversial because of the investor state dispute settlement clause which will allow foreign investor to sue government over policies that might cause harm to them;
e-commerce and telecommunication chapter raises major privacy concerns;
intellectual property chapter wherein it includes controversial rules regarding pharmaceutical companies and data exclusivity apart from the privacy concerns.

2.2 Digital 2 Dozen (D2D)

D2D is set of rules and aims which is specifically drafted to be followed for the trade agreements related to open internet and digital economy. More specific aims of TPP as provided within the ‘Digital 2 Dozen,’ aiming for more liberalised trade in digital goods and services, are [8]:

promoting free and open internet,
prohibiting digital custom duties,
securing basic non-discrimination principles,
enabling cross-border data flows,
preventing localization barriers,
barring forced technology transfers,
advancing innovative authentication methods,
delivering enforceable consumer protections,
safeguarding network competition,
fostering innovative encryption products, and
building an adaptable framework.

Strategic goal of the US in introducing D2D as goals of TPP has been to set up a trend within Asian region for all the trade agreements. It is expected to ensure that if TPP is a success, similar goals and policy frameworks will be followed for other trade agreements as we. For example, the USA-India partnership also enshrines similar aims and so does the USA-Korea partnership. Hence while India is not part of TPP, USA is nonetheless trying to get India into a partnership which is similar to the TPP. The language proposed by the USA in TPP negotiations has always been supportive for cross border data flows as it claims that companies have mechanism to keep a privacy check and privacy would not be undermined, but countries like New Zealand and Australia which have strong privacy protection laws nationally have raised concerns which will be discussed in further sections [9]. Also not only in privacy rights but Digital Dozen initiative also affects other digital rights related to - excessive copyright terms TPP proposed to extend the term of copyright to hundred years which deprive access to knowledge; as in the U.S motive to give more power to private entities , the ISP obligations enumerated within TPP which puts freedom of expression and privacy at risk as ISPs are allowed to check for copyright infringement and TPP does not put any privacy restriction in this regard; introduction of new fair use rules; ban on circumvention of digital locks or DRMs; no compulsory limitation for persons with disabilities; lack of fair use for journalistic right; while net neutrality is major issue is many developing nations in Asia no effective provision for net neutrality is aimed at in the D2D initiative; prohibits open source mandates which puts barrier for countries which want to release any software as open source as a policy decision [10].

3. Major Issues Related to Data Protection and Privacy in the TPP

3.1. Data Protection

One of the major concern raised against TPP is regarding data protection provisions that have been integrated within the E- Commerce chapter of the agreement. Article 14.11 and Article 14 .13 are the ones that deal with data flow related to consumer information.Article 14.11 in the agreement puts a requirement on the member states to allow transfer of data across border and Article 14.13 does not allow the companies to host data on local servers. Concerns were raised in few member states for instance, Australian Privacy Foundation raised concerns over Article 14.11 which requires transfers to be allowed in context of business activities of service suppliers. It claimed that exception to this provision is very narrow and the repercussion for not following the exception is that investor state dispute settlement proceedings can be initiated, which is not sufficient to protect privacy. Also, it highlighted the issue that with the narrow exception provided under Article 14.13 which relates to prohibition on data localisation, it might have adverse effect on the implementation of national privacy laws within Australia [11].

Another provision which is of major concern is Article 14.13 which prohibit data localisation. It will raise problems for countries like Indonesia and China which will have to change their local laws to implement the provision [12]. Since there already has been a major concern with regard to USA- EU Safe Harbour Agreement which was later made subject to the ECJ’s ruling on data protection, which invalidated any arrangement which provides voluntary enterprises responsibility to enforce privacy. But both the USA and EU are in process of renegotiating the agreement.The major concern was that in EU data protection is a fundamental right while in USA data protection is more consumer centric. When similar concerns were raised in TPP negotiations, they were rebutted as USA claimed that FTA does not concern itself with data protection [13].

In 2012 Australia proposed an alternative language to TPP which allowed countries to place restriction on data flow as long as it was not a barrier to trade. U.S responded to concerns raised by the Australia through a side letter which ensured Australia that U.S and Australia have a mutual understanding in relation to privacy and U.S will ensure the privacy of data with regards to Australia. While Australia’s concern was given acknowledgement other countries which raised similar issues were not given any assurances [14]. US instead proposed ad- hoc strategy that gave private companies power to form privacy policy with implementation through state machinery [15].

3.2. Digital Privacy

Article 14.8 in the E- Commerce chapter of the agreement states that countries can form legal framework for the protection of rights but the kind of ‘legal framework’ is not defined. Also, nowhere it states that the privacy protection or data protection laws are expressly exempted, rather it states that any such policy implemented by member states will be put under review of TPP standards. The standards which TPP proposes to follow are based on the underlying idea that any such policy should not hinder free trade in any way. This test will be applied by tribunals which are experts in trade and investment and not on data protection or human rights [16]. While Article 14.8 provides for protection of private information of consumers but the footnote to the provision renders it ineffective. The footnote states that member countries can adopt legal framework for the protection of data which can be done by self-regulation by industry and does not provide for any comprehensive data protection obligation upon the member states [17]. Similar to this Article 13.4 of the telecommunications chapter under TPP also states that the countries can apply regulation regarding confidentiality of the messages as long as it is not “a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade in services" [18].

Another chapter which raises major concerns about the privacy rights is intellectual property. It affects privacy through the provisions related to technological protective measures and the provision that regulate ISP’s liability. Regarding the TPM provision, the TPP follows the DMCA model whereby the exception to anti- circumvention provision is very narrow and does not apply to anti- trafficking provision. The exception allows user to circumvent TPM if it affect the user's privacy in any way, although this provision does not apply to ant- trafficking of TPM. The provision regarding ISP’s liability states that there should be cooperation between ISPs and rights holders and it does not prohibit ISPs to monitor its users. Also TPP proposes the notice for takedown and identification of the infringer by the ISP but this provision is not in consonance with laws of member states, like that of Peru which does not have any copyright law on ISP . Also many countries have tried to introduce proper privacy laws along with implementation of ISP liability but that is not done within the TPP [19]. TPP as whole aims to give greater power to private regulators without providing for minimum standard for protection of privacy.

Although TPP is not a data protection agreement but it consequently deals with various aspects of data protection, hence it is prospective model for privacy and data protection practices in future trade agreements. If positive obligations are included within the free trade agreements it will have an advancing impact on the data protection regime.

4.Implications of TPP for RCEP

While TPP has such lacunas similar provision are proposed in RCEP to which India is a party and which will have serious implication as many of the countries have inadequate data protection laws nationally and with the introduction of such an FTA the exploitation of privacy rights will be rampant [20]. To avoid this EU directive on data protection should be taken into consideration in the negotiations of such FTAs. But for the RCEP negotiations are still going on and in India many companies like Flipkart, Snapdeal etc. have started preparing for the changing norms. The government claims that it is going to accept best practices in the region which indicates that it is going to have same policies as that of TPP. Although people from industry have raised concerns that while there are national laws but it is difficult to check third party involvement within the business and it is becoming increasingly difficult to keep the consumer data confidential [21].

5. Implications of TPP in the Context of EU Safe-Harbour Judgement

Mr. Maximillian Schrems, an Austrian National residing in Austria, has been a user of the Facebook social network since 2008. Any person residing in EU who wishes to use Facebook is required to conclude, at the time of his registration, a contract with Facebook Ireland (a subsidiary of Facebook Inc. which itself is established in Unites States). Some or all of the personal data of the Facebook Ireland’s users who residing in EU is transferred to servers belonging to Facebook Inc. that are located in United States, where it undergoes processing. On 25 June 2013 Mr Schrems made a complaint to the commissioner by which he in essence asked the latter to exercise his statutory powers by prohibiting Facebook Ireland from transferring his personal data to Unites States, and this led to the Maximillian Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner case [22]. He contended that in his complaint that the law and practice in force in that country did not ensure adequate protection of the personal data held in its territory against the surveillance activities that were engaged in thereby by the public authorities. Mr Schrems referred in this regard to the revelations made by Edward Snowden concerning the activities of the United States intelligence services, in particular those of the NSA.(para 26, 27, 28). The case came in the court ruled that “that a third country which ensures an adequate level of protection, does not prevent a supervisory authority of a Member State, within the meaning of Article 28 of the EU 94/46 directive as amended, from examining the claim of a person concerning the protection of his rights and freedoms in regard to the processing of personal data relating to him which has been transferred from a Member State to that third country when that person contends that the law and practices in force in the third country do not ensure an adequate level of protection. The ruling implies that personal data cannot be transferred to third country which does not provide adequate level of protection.

EU safe harbour judgment and EU directive on privacy provide contrasting rules related to privacy. While TPP gives power to private entities to formulate rules regarding privacy while the recent ECJ judgment invalidated giving such power to private entities under EU-US Safe Harbour Agreement. Also in context of the same judgment Hamburg’s Commissioner for Data Privacy And Freedom of Information announced an investigation into the data transfer taking place through Facebook and Google to U.S. Hence in the light of the recent judgment member states within EU are not allowed to permit cross border data flow, in contrast to this one of the main goals of TPP is to maintain free flow of data across border [23]. EU is this regard has also set forth the proposal to introduce General Data Protection Regulation. (GDPR). Although U.S and EU are trying to renegotiate the agreement but the privacy concerns raised cannot be ignored. Hence following the same model as was invalidate under the ECJ judgment lets US exploit privacy of member states under TPP. Similar concerns as raised within the judgment are also raised in India as it also following the same model within U.S-India Cyber Relationship Agreement and in RCEP negotiations.

6. Implications of TPP in the context of USA-India Cyber Relationship

While India is not part of TPP but it might have an effect on the U.S India Cyber Relationship Agreement. In August 2015 there was re- initiation of the India-U.S cyber dialogue to address common concerns related to cybersecurity and to develop better partnerships between public and private sector for betterment of digital economy [24]. One of the key aim of this agreement is free flow of information between two nations, which suffers from similar problem that it will put privacy of the citizens at risk. Also India does not have any bilateral treaty which ensures cyber data protection in such a scenario the only solution is data localisation, but this agreement will put data at risk [25]. Hence while the TPP negotiations were going on and also RCEP is being discussed the concerns about privacy and data protection need to be raised as mention in earlier section regarding implications of TPP on RCEP, the USA-India Cyber Relationship also faces the same implications..Although the aim of USA-India Cyber Relationship is to ensure cybersecurity. After the cases of Muzaffarnagar riots, upheaval in North -Eastern states and Gujarat riots, India has realised it is important to ensure compliance from the social media companies. India sees the USA-India Cyber Relationship as an opportunity to achieve this goal. The Google Transparency Report states that that India made around three thousand requests to Google for user data [26], which indicate at the country's interest in having a common data understanding with the major social media companies (almost all of which are located in USA) about requesting and sharing of user activity data. While this concern is being addressed through the agreement, it is difficult to ignore the clause related to free flow of information, and if the meaning of the term is extended and adopted from TPP itself will put digital privacy of Indian citizens at risk [27].

7. Conclusion

Even though TPP negotiation are completed but the ratification of the agreement is still underway. TPP is being seen as one of a kind trade agreement because it is the first time that countries across the globe have come together as a whole to address concerns of modern trade. Although it fails to address some of the key concerns related to privacy and data protection which are becoming increasingly important. Data protection and privacy issues cannot be seen in isolation and needs to merged within the modern day trade agreements. The D2D component by the USA is strategic move to have trade dominance in Asia and to compete with China’s growth . TPP has privacy and data protection lacunae within the e- commerce , telecommunications and intellectual property discussion.Although it might have serious implications on RCEP negotiation and USA- India Cyber Relationship Dialogue. Similar concern regarding data protection has already been addressed by ECJ judgment invalidating USA-EU Safe Harbour Agreement but the similar ad - hoc strategy has been incorporated within TPP. Since TPP might be considered as best practice model for future FTAs in the Asian region it is important to raise and address these privacy concerns now.

8. Endnotes

[1] The signatory countries include Australia, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, United States of America, Vietnam, Chile, Brunei, Singapore, New Zealand. "The Trans-Pacific Partnership," http://www.ustr.gov/tpp (last visited Jul 7, 2016).

[2] "The Origins and Evolution of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)," Global Research, http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-origins-and-evolution-of-the-trans-pacific-partnership-tpp/5357495 (last visited Jul 7, 2016).

[3] Fergusson, Ian F., Mark A. McMinimy & Brock R. Williams, "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): In Brief," (2015), http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/key_workplace/1477/ (last visited Jul 1, 2016).

[4] Gajdos, Lukas, The Trans-Pacific Partnership and its impact on EU trade, Policy Department, Directorate-General for External Policies, Policy Briefing (2013), http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/briefing_note/join/2013/491479/EXPO-INTA_SP(2013)491479_EN.pdf.

[5] Twining, Daniel, Hans Kundnani & Peter Sparding, Trans-Pacific Partnership: geopolitical implications for EU-US relations, Policy Department, Directorate-General for External Policies, June 24 (2016), http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/535008/EXPO_STU(2016)535008_EN.pdf.

[6] USTR, "Remarks by Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Robert Holleyman to the New Democrat Network," https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/speechestranscripts/2015/may/remarks-deputy-us-trade (last visited Jul 4, 2016).

[7] Murphy, Katharine, "Trans-Pacific Partnership: four key issues to watch out for," The Guardian, November 6, 2015, https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/nov/06/trans-pacific-partnership-four-key-issues-to-watch-out-for (last visited Jul 7, 2016).

[8] USTR, "The Digital 2 Dozen" (2016), https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Digital-2-Dozen-Final.pdf (last visited Jul 1, 2016).

[9] Fergusson, Ian F.m Mark A. McMinimy & Brock R. Williams, "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations and issues for congress," (2015), http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/key_workplace/1412/ (last visited Jul 8, 2016).

[10] "How the TPP Will Affect You and Your Digital Rights," Electronic Frontier Foundation (2015), https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/12/how-tpp-will-affect-you-and-your-digital-rights (last visited Jul 7, 2016).

[11] Australian Privacy Foundation (APF), Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (2016), https://www.privacy.org.au/Papers/Parlt-TPP-160310.pdf.

[12] Greenleaf, Graham, "The TPP & Other Free Trade Agreements: Faustian Bargains for Privacy?," SSRN (2016), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Papers.cfm?abstract_id=2732386 (last visited Jul 1, 2016).

[13] "GED-Project: Transatlantic Data Flows and Data Protection," GED Blog (2015), https://ged-project.de/topics/competitiveness/transatlantic-data-flows-and-data-protection-the-state-of-the-debate/ (last visited Jul 1, 2016).

[14] Geist, Michael, "The Trouble with the TPP, Day 14: No U.S. Assurances for Canada on Privacy," (2016), http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2016/01/the-trouble-with-the-tpp-day-14-no-u-s-assurances-for-canada-on-privacy/ (last visited Jul 4, 2016).

[15] Aaronson, Susan Ariel, "What does TPP mean for the Open Internet?" From Policy Brief on Trade Agreements and Internet Governance Prepared for the Global Commission on Internet Governance (2015), https://www.gwu.edu/~iiep/events/DigitalTrade2016/TPPPolicyBrief.pdf (last visited Jul 5, 2016).

[16] Lomas, Natasha, "TPP Trade Agreement Slammed For Eroding Online Rights," TechCrunch, http://social.techcrunch.com/2015/11/05/tpp-vs-privacy/ (last visited Jun 30, 2016).

[17] "Q&A: The Trans-Pacific Partnership," Human Rights Watch (2016), https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/12/qa-trans-pacific-partnership (last visited Jul 1, 2016).

[18] "TPP Full Text Released," People Over Politics (2015), http://peopleoverpolitics.org/2015/11/07/tpp-just-as-bad-as-you-thought/ (last visited Jul 7, 2016).

[19] "Right to Privacy in Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP ) Negotiations," Knowledge Ecology International, http://keionline.org/node/1164 (last visited Jul 1, 2016).

[20] Asian Trade Centre, "E-Commerce and Digital Trade Proposals for RCEP (2016)," http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5393d501e4b0643446abd228/t/575a654c86db438e86009fa1/1465541967821/RCEP+E-commerce+June+2016.pdf (last visited Jul 1, 2016).

[21] "E-commerce companies like Flipkart, Snapdeal to beef up data security to meet RCEP norms," The Economic Times, http://economictimes.indiatimes.com//articleshow/49068419.cms (last visited Jul 1, 2016).

[22] ECLI:EU:C:2015:650 (C -362/14)

[23] King et al., "Privacy law, cross-border data flows, and the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement: what counsel need to know," Lexology, http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=b5c0b400-8161-4439-a4b7-131552ad5209 (last visited Jul 4, 2016).

[24] "U.S.-India Business Council Applauds Resumption of Cybersecurity Dialogue," U.S.-India Business Council (2015), http://www.usibc.com/press-release/us-india-business-council-applauds-resumption-cybersecurity-dialogue (last visited Jul 5, 2016).

[25] Sukumar, Arun Mohan, "India Is Coming up Against the Limits of Its Strategic Partnership With the United States," The Wire (2016), http://thewire.in/40403/india-is-coming-up-against-the-limits-of-its-strategic-partnership-with-the-united-states/ (last visited Jul 4, 2016).

[26] Countries – Google Transparency Report, https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/countries/ (last visited Jul 8, 2016).

[27] Sukumar, Arun Mohan, "A case for the Net’s Ctrl+Alt+Del," The Hindu, September 5, 2015, http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a-case-for-the-nets-ctrlaltdel/article7616355.ece (last visited Jul 5, 2016).

9. Author Profile

Shubhangi Heda is a Student of Jindal Global Law School, O.P Jindal Global University. She has completed her fourth year. She gives due importance to popular culture in her life and loves to read fiction and like to watch TV-shows, her favorite being 'White Collar'.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/tpp-and-d2-implications-for-data-protection-and-digital-privacy

Training

Admin — 2017-11-23T15:44:37Z

The Rotary Club of Salem in association with the Centre for Internet and Society – Access to Knowledge, India and Salem Tamil Sangam is organising series of “Wikimedia training and orientation” programme for the youth on December 9 and 10 and also from 16 –17 at Rotary Hall in the city.

The news was published by the Hindu on November 20, 2017.

This training of trainers programme is aimed at increasing the digital content in Tamil and make them to be part of open knowledge movement of Wikimedia movement, R. Venkatachalapathy, president of Rotary Club of Salem said in a statement here on Sunday.

Interested candidates can register their names in group or individually at Rotary Club of Salem on or before November 25.

Interested candidates can register their names by visiting Wikipedia

https://ta.wikipedia.org or

https://en.wikipedia.org

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/hindu-november-20-2017-training

Train the Trainer: Running effective outreach activities in India

tanvir — 2015-07-30T15:20:46Z

It is heartening to report that many Wikimedia projects in Indian languages have sustained, and even experienced an upward trend in, editor engagement. However, in terms of content creation, the majority of these projects are still facing grave challenges that put their very existence at risk.


February’s Train the Trainer program—which aims to increase the number of new editors and ‘ambassadors’ for the movement at large—proved a rewarding experience for attendees. Photo by U.B. Pavanaja, freely licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0.

Pageview statistics for Indian-language Wikipedias are pleasantly surprising. Almost all exceed one million unique views every month—but despite these positive readership figures, very few of these readers become actively involved in the project’s communities. There is almost no increase in the number of active and very active editors on a month-to-month basis.

These statistics are alarming. They suggest a very real possibility of volunteer burnout, a dearth of second-generation editors who might continue established work, and, perhaps most importantly, the projects losing their reputation as frequently-updated and reliable encyclopedias.

The most realistic way of dealing with this problem is to bring in new volunteers who will be guided by more experienced users. They would, eventually, fill the shoes of senior Wikimedians and continue to fight for free and open knowledge.

The Centre for Internet and Society – Access to Knowledge (CIS-A2K)—a campaign to promote the fundamental principles of justice, freedom, and economic development—realised as part of its needs-assessment program that although outreach activities are being conducted to attract more volunteers to Wikipedia, they had not been as successful as expected.

To address this problem, CIS-A2K came up with the ‘Train the Trainer’ program (TTT). The program is designed to teach volunteers essential skills and abilities to, in turn, train the general public on all things Wikipedia.

These volunteers, or “trainers,” develop key competencies that will allow them to conduct a successful outreach workshop, such as public speaking, presentation skills, peer-to-peer learning, effective communication, reporting, and followup strategies.

To take part in the TTT program, it is imperative that participants be active Wikipedians. CIS-A2K is angling TTT as both a skill-building initiative amongst Indian-language Wikimedians, as well as a platform where Indian-language Wikipedians can meet and greet each other in-person. This allows participants to interact with Wikimedians from many different communities, to understand their nature of engagement, and share the challenges they have faced and overcome.

The contextual learning and exchange of ideas at these events, similar to editathons, are very special. They help participants feel like they are a part of both their linguistic community and a greater Indian-language community, opening up new opportunities of collaboration, project development, and friendship.

TTT intends to train Indian-language Wikimedians into effective ambassadors of the movement—keen and able to spread the goals and mission of the open knowledge movement. The program also strives to combine best practices from all over the world, taking cues from various chapters, user groups, and thematic organisations. It builds bridges between communities in terms of communication, encouraging partnerships and collaborations that can result in long term rewards.

Link to the original entry on Wikimedia Blog

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/train-the-trainer-running-effective-outreach-activities-in-india

Train the Trainer program 2018

sailesh — 2019-03-06T08:13:05Z

Trainer the Trainer program is an annual three days residential program organised by the Access to Knowledge Program of Centre for Internet and Society. The program identifies the community leaders and brings Wikimedians from and around the SAARC countries to train them and provide mentorship in their work.

Train the Trainer 2018 was the 5th iteration of the Train the Trainer Program by the CIS-A2K. This year TTT was organised in the city of Mysore. The event was attended by 21 Wikimedians throughout the Indic language communities, including three foreign delegates from Bangladesh and Nepal. Like previous years, this year, TTT followed the pre-event session with ice breaker activities, which helped the Wikimedians to know each other, and interact with the fellow participants.

The day one of TTT 2018 began with a small round of formal introductions for participants who joined later, the idea of the introduction session was for the participants to share their area expertise and projects they are working on. We have always identified that during the free time participants interact with each other and talk about collaboration activities, so this session helps to know more about your fellow participants. We had a Master Class (Master Class 1) about the Pre and Post event best practices, for the participants to understand how to plan an an event and what should be the preworks before organising an event, we also had sessions on best practices for community members to write and review grant proposals and an introductory session on Wikidata.

The day two was a field trip (Master Class 2) to Sri Chamarajendra Zoological Gardens, a local zoo in Mysore. The intent of the field trip was to give exposure to the participants to learn in an open environment. Followed by the field trip, a session on Diversity initiatives was conducted to understand the challenges and opportunities of having a diverse community.

On the day three, the participants were introduced to a variety of Wikimedia events (Master Class 3) and a panel discussion by Wikimedia affiliates from India (WMF, Chapter, User-group and CIS-A2K) about the organisational structure and responsibilities. The aim of the panel was to help the participants to understand the structure of Wikimedia affiliates in Inda, to share the different kind of events and collaborations they can do with the affiliates. This year CIS-A2K introduced Revolving cafe for the participants to attend some parallel sessions related to Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons, Institutional Partnership, Support and Safety. The day was concluded with a lightning talk on Social media best practices, how affiliates and community member should use social media channels to promote their work. Subsequently, there was feedback and summing up session.

This year CIS-A2K made a few changes to the Train the Trainer program, for the first time the event was held out of Bangalore. We had invited a longtime Punjabi Wikimedian, a previous alumnus of TTT to externally audit the TTT 2018 being part of the team. Dr Manavpreet Kaur has provided a 10 points suggestion/feedback to the team which will be addressed in TTT 2019.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/train-the-trainer-program-2018