Internet Governance Forum meets again [updated]

It is that time of the year, when the annual Internet Governance Forum (IGF) meets again. This year, the event is hosted by Indonesian government and we are in Bali. I won't lie, concentrating in a beautiful place like this, surrounded by stunning beach hasn't been easy (especially when you are the only person dressed in business causal outfit while the rest of the guests walk around in their bikinis and other summer attire).  

This year's general theme is Enhancing Multistakeholder Cooperation for Growth and Sustainable Development. As it has been in the past years, the guests of the conference represent a diverse group- government representatives, civil society institutions, media, academia, human rights defenders, freedom of press advocates, activists, journalists, and bloggers.

I have only been to two IGFs but its enough to compare. Whether it was the internet, the venue or any other logistical matter, IGF2013 was by far, better organized than IGF2012 in Baku. There were shuttle buses waiting for guests at the airport not to mention a registration table set up at the arrival terminal. Of course, visas were issued upon arrival with no difficulties (this is not to say that there weren't visa issues- many participants, especially those traveling from Africa had difficulties to either obtain visa, or missed the forum, because they were managed to get it on time). 

The registration on the first day of the forum was also very quick. Perhaps it was because our delegation arrived early but still it did seem all throughout the day, that the registration line moved more or less quick.

Last year I attended IGF as an independent, this year however,  I am here as part of a kick ass Freedom House delegation and its been a privilege to be here with them (in fact, check out the Freedom on the Net reports published by the Freedom House this year).

Some highlights

Registration: The registration process was very efficient as I mentioned earlier.  One strange encounter was when I received my badge, it had my picture from last year IGF. I don't remember signing any papers letting IGF Secretariat keep my photo. As it turned out later during the day I wasn't the only one. Few more people who attended IGF last year in Azerbaijan were issued badges with photos from last year (as I discovered later, it wasn't only the photos from last year but also USB sticks too). 

Another bizarre experience was meeting Miss Internet Bali 2013- indeed, you didn't misread that. There was Miss Internet, who was the pageant winner (if you are fluent in Indonesian you can learn more about it here). According to an article in Jakarta post I found online the winner is the 19 year old Dewa Ayu Windu Sari Devi. She is a student at the Udayana University's School of Economics. Her extensive knowledge on Internet usage and services in Indonesia got her the prize. Devi is going to be the symbol of using the Internet "smartly and wisely" reported Jakarta post.

Wifi: the internet connection which was terrible last year (not to mention completely inaccessible during some of the sessions which focused on the human rights or freedom of expression issues in particular) was working just fine here (some participants had some difficulties connecting); each meeting room had a giant stand set up with a list of names of each sessions scheduled to take place in these rooms. The leaflet distributed upon registration with the IGF program provided the map of the venue with room names and numbers. 

I think the main reason why it was different this year was because for Azerbaijani government it wasn't so much about the quality of organizing but about simply having an event like this in order to add it to its list of "trophies" (there is an Azerbaijan booth here proudly distributing a report from last year's IGF, but proudly failing to mention anything about the human rights discussions or press freedom related criticism raised during the meetings). As an alternative you can read this report titled "False Freedom" that just came out. 

Issues discussed: Throughout the week some very interesting and important discussions were made-highlighting safety of bloggers, protecting rights of online activists, the role of governments in ensuring safety of users and free access of information and more (for the list of workshops and sessions see here). Surely there were sessions when internet policies of repressive governments was questioned and the lack of accountability measures- of holding governments responsible- highlighted. But whether there is going to be a solution to this any time soon is yet to be seen.

Wrapping up this one week long event, I am looking back and thinking of ways of taking back with me the knowledge (especially on online security) and contacts and hoping that meetings like IGF have more impact on certain governments and issues. But also get their control mechanism in order- because it is no doubt interesting that IGF is hosted in countries where human rights and freedom of the press records are not necessarily at their best. 

ICT progress in Azerbaijan

It was Vinton Cerf's comment in this article about the decision makers of ICT sector that prompted me to write this post. While writing on the importance of the Internet, Cerf put great emphasis on the closed- door meeting of the International Telecommunication Union that gathered in Dubai earlier this month and which according to Google's Chief Internet Evangelist is an ideal venue for repressive regimes, place more aggressive limitations on the open Internet. He believes these gatherings only limit the use of the Internet further:

"[...] this inter- governmental agency is the wrong place to make decisions about the future of the Internet. Only governments have vote at the ITU. This includes governments that do not support a free and open Internet. Engineers, companies, and people that build and use the web have no vote".

Back to the case of Azerbaijan, and focusing especially on the last part of what Vinton Cerf said about the ITU and decision making, I wonder of the IT developments Azerbaijani government claims to have achieved. According to Ali M. Abbasov, Minister of Communications and Information Technologies the main purpose of public policy in the field of ICT is:

"to provide transition to the information society, create and develop an information and knowledge- based, competitive economy and arrange participation of citizens and social institutions in the management process [...]"

I wonder how much of this policy and IT related developments involve the engineers, companies, and the people that build and use the web and information technologies in decision- making and development process? According to Mr. Abbasov, "naturally great public support, properly defined long- term strategy, and well grounded public policy play an important role in the achievement of these developments" but whether there is an actual call for public support on behalf of the government I doubt.

Azerbaijani government no doubt, sent a large delegation to the ITU event in Dubai, but if we look at the agendas of some of the authoritarian states attending the event ranging from banning anonymity from the web to making it easier to find and arrest the dissidents and etc. the real intentions of Azerbaijani government slightly blur. After all, it is a country where Internet is largely free, and the government is notorious for its crack down on political dissidents even online (given Internet is considered as part of mass media, recently the authorities been thinking of passing a law that would impose restrictions on websites with "obscene" and "anti-national" content). But I wont get into details of Azerbaijan's ICT sector. For more information on this you can read Open Net Initiative's country report. 

I will just like to get back to the original point/question- how involved are the people outside of the government in decision making of information and technologies that affect everybody?

Talking about women in Azerbaijan

Yesterday I had an opportunity to speak about women rights and their presence online in Azerbaijan. Here is the video.

Interview with Arzu Geybullayeva @ IGF12 from APC on Vimeo.

Smart dictators in modern age

It was an article I was reading in Foreign Policy and titled "The Dictators are Smarter Than You Think" that got me to question the leadership of Azerbaijan, which too is often referred to as being a dictatorship. But where did that got us? I mean, where have all the criticisms, all the low rankings, or else got us? It certainly didn't change the leadership if not made it worse- harsher, blatant and more open in fact in what it does. In fact, it feels as if criticisms aimed at Azerbaijani leadership feed the roots of this regime making it far more dictatorial (with few exceptions here and there as release of journalists and activists).

Now the article bases itself on a book by Dobson, "The dictator's leaning curve: inside the global battle for democracy". "In many cases Dobson writes, modern dictators understand that its in their [dictators] interest to observe the appearance of democratic norms even while they're subverting them", which explains perfectly well some of the sudden improvement like instances (such as release of donkey bloggers, and other similar cases). The country's leadership understands that full isolation of the country and its people wont be the same as it would have been say several decades ago. The rules of politics have changed but so has the game. 

So instead of cutting ourselves completely from the world, we boast of our new successes and developments, modern streets and buildings while keeping a tight lid on media, human rights advocates and the rest of things that doesn't represent development and modernity for our government.

Whats left to do is to sit tight and wait for a day, minute, month or whatever that is and hope for the best or continue learning, reading, sharing and making sure that awareness is there, knowledge is there, lust for change is there and work on making our dictatorships transform to democracies (well in Azerbaijani case we already are a democracy, what I meant to say, a real democracy in this case). Good luck to us all!