WSIS final outcome:

Gender equality reduced to digital divide only

December 1, 2005

Press release from FIRE/RIF – Feminist International Radio Endeavour

By Margaret Thompson & María Suárez Toro

San José, Costa Rica

Gender references deleted between WSIS Phase I and II

While many women and women’s groups as well as the Gender Caucus were pleased to see recognition of the gender digital divide in the Tunis documents, they were likewise disappointed because numerous references to gender that had been included in the Geneva Declaration of Principles from WSIS Part I in 2003 were removed in the Tunis final documents.    Deleted items ranged from a call for ensuring that the Information Society promotes gender equality, women’s empowerment and full participation in decision-making processes, to removal of gender barriers to ICT education and training for girls and women.  Also deleted was mention of the need for a gender-sensitive curriculum to enhance women and girls’ ability to produce their own ICT content.

One of the major challenges related to inclusion of gender in the final WSIS documents is something that women and gender advocates face in numerous foras, which is that gender is viewed as a separate issue, and not regarded as something that underlies many other issues related to ICTs.   Such attitudes prevail, even among some who favor gender equality and women's empowerment.  Thus some governments fought (successfully) for removal the gender provisions as peripheral to the “core” issues of ICTs. 

Another problem at WSIS is that very few government delegations included persons with expertise on gender equality, according to Karen Banks of APC.  Instead, governments sent persons whose expertise was ICTs and telecommunications.  Banks also noted that gender advocacy is primarily regarded as “women’s work,” and would have been overlooked even in civil society groups and caucuses during the WSIS process, had not gender advocates been lobbying to ensure that these issues were built into core ICT issues and processes.

Heike Jensen, of the NGO Gender Strategies Working Group and the WSIS Gender Caucus noted that the lack of references to women and gender in the documents “basically mirrors the finding that was prominent at this year’s Beijing+10 evaluation: Gender equality and women’s empowerment may constitute a normative consensus, but the political will - and the financial resources to make it actually happen - are lacking everywhere. This is something we still need to work on.”

According to Annabel Srebeny, “Women still often lack the critical mass of numbers and weight of speaking at international fora, and it is still a rare occasion for men to recognize voluntarily the issue of gender equality.  That means not forsaking a ‘women in media/technology’ argument for a ‘gender and technology’ one, but pursuing both together.”

Magaly Pazello of DAWN (Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era)  declared in her statement as focal point for WSIS on behalf of the Civil Society Gender Caucus in the closing plenary that by excluding gender, they are sending the wrong message to the international community. “Is the image of the Opening Ceremony the message you want to portray? It is the exact measure of the debt you have with regards to women: one female (speaker) among many men. This is especially serious after 10 years since the World Conference on Women in Beijing, China, when women still live under cultural, social and economic conditions that impede their full participation… We demand full participation in the new opportunity that opens with the emergence of an Information and Knowledge Society.”

Human Rights:  Another “peripheral” issue along with gender

The Civil Society final declaration criticized the fact that while human rights issues have been given brief mention in the Geneva Declaration of Principles from WSIS Part I, these disappeared in the final Tunis Commitment. 

As noted in the Latin American & Caribbean Women’s Open Letter to WSIS on Gender Equality & the Information Society:

Issues such as freedom of speech as a human right and censorship were also raised by numerous groups during the WSIS in Tunisia, particularly in the context of a country that has harassed and even jailed over 400 Internet “activists” along with journalists and communicators for practicing their right to communicate.  Likewise, numerous Tunisian journalists and human rights advocates were not allowed to attend the WSIS event in their own country.

Another key issue that was left out of the Tunis documents is that of the right to privacy.  According to the Civil Society final declaration, the mention of privacy disappeared, “to make room for extensive underlining of security needs, as if privacy were a threat to security, whereas the opposite is true: privacy is an essential requirement to security.”

Internet Governance:  The “war is over” but the battles have just begun

One major outcome of the WSIS process was a decision to form an Internet Governance Forum (IGF) for multi-stakeholder dialogue, to provide input on governance issues.  Civil society groups expressed optimism about the potential for democratic input into Internet governance.  However, the current reality is that much of the decision making power remains in private hands, with the California-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), whose decisions on Internet issues are relayed to the US government for final approval.  During the WSIS process, the European Union led efforts to shift governance away from unilateral power by one country over the Internet, and the IGF was the compromise agreement. 

Critics of the arrangement with ICANN having unilateral control with the US government include many developing nations and the EU, who contend that since the Internet is a global tool, no one country should control it, but jurisdiction should be a multilateral arrangement.   Viviane Reding, the EU commissioner for Internet and media affairs told the BBC in an interview in October: "There must not be any government involvement in the day-to-day management of the Internet, neither one of the U.S. government nor by any other government." 

Prior to the WSIS in Tunis in November, the US had said it would cut its connection to ICANN.  However, in August, the US government asked ICANN to halt an initiative to establish a specific domain name of .xxx for pornographic websites.  This proposal was earlier supported by the US, but thousands of letters from conservative Christian groups forced the US government to rethink its position, and in turn assert its power over ICANN by asking for tabling of the proposal.  This move was proof that despite government claims, the US maintained ultimate decision making power over the Internet.

As part of the WSIS process, civil society groups were an important actor in negotiating for creation of the IGF as a multi-stakeholder forum and are now exploring ways to participate and have an influence, equal to that of governments and the private sector.  As Renate Bloem of the Civil Society Bureau declared at the last day’s press conference, “we have moved to become a partner in negotiations.”   

The IGF, which will consist of representatives from government, business, civil society and NGOs, represents a step toward making Internet governance more participatory and transparent.  However, it would have no formal concrete power beyond providing input and expertise, and its recommendations are non-binding.

The Forum will be established in 2006, with the first meeting to be held in Athens.    Issues to be addressed at this inaugural meeting include Internet governance, spam, cyber crime, and privacy.

ICT Financing:  Another heated controversy remains unresolved

Financing of ICT development was another controversial issue that was addressed during the WSIS process.  The Tunis final documents recognize that ICTs are a vital tool for national development and for achievement of the Millenium Development Goals.

In order to help developing countries in particular, the UN is creating a Digital Solidarity Fund, which will be comprised of public and private funding.   

Likewise, strengthened cooperation and solidarity among these different  interests is encouraged, but no financial mechanisms are included to ensure that this happens. 

Contributions will be  voluntary, and so far, few public or private entities have pledged new money for the Fund, which currently holds 6-7 million Euros, far short of the ICT needs of many developing countries, particularly in Africa.

What’s Next?

Discussions are still underway among civil society groups about the WSIS follow-up process.  On the one hand, the multi-stakeholder Gender Caucus has ended, as it had been convened specifically for WSIS. Women activists and their organizations will undertake an evaluation of the results and challenges, and meet at the Know How Conference in Mexico next year to assess how to organize towards the new challenges posed by the Tunis results.

As noted in the Latin American and Caribbean women’s open letter to the WSIS Forum:

The voices of half of humanity will not be silenced.  As women we will continue contributing to the information and knowledge societies from our diverse perspectives and experiences, conscious of the principle of equality that inspires and motivates us.  We are confident that our full participation will guarantee a more equitable and supportive world among human beings, today and for the future. 

In the region, feminist activists and journalists who took part in the WSIS process concluded that women need to continue influencing global Internet policies by “addressing the outcomes of the process in our countries and region, training journalists and communicators about the importance of this issue for our work and networking so as to strengthen our efforts,” said Rosalinda Alarcón of La Cuerda in Guatemala. 

You may reprint or re-distribute this press release but please give credit to RIF/FIRE, Apartado 239, Ciudad Colon, Costa Rica; oficina@radiofeminista.net.