This is now a legacy site and could be not up to date. Please move to the new IGF Website at

You are here

NRIs Virtual Meeting XIV 13 Nov 2017

- Virtual Meeting XIV, 13 November 2017, 14:30 p.m. UTC -


1. The 14th virtual meeting of the National, Regional and Youth IGF Initiatives (NRIs), took place on 13 November at 14:30 p.m. UTC.
2. The meeting was hosted by the IGF Secretariat’s NRIs Focal Point, Anja Gengo. Agenda is attached to this document as Annex A1 and a list of Meeting Participants as Annex A2.
3. The Host asked the participants to briefly introduce themselves, and to review the agenda for its final approval. After the introduction, some participants suggested to add under the last agenda item, the status of the NRIs collaborative sessions; status of the NRIs booth logistics and preparations; and the scheduling of potential bilateral meetings with international and intergovernmental organizations that expressed interest to learn more about the NRIs processes.  With this, the agenda was adopted (attached as Annex A1).
Summary of key points
4. After each participant has introduced himself/herself, the Host reminded that all submitted inputs for developing the policy/guiding questions, have been consolidated into five more broader questions, that are:
1) How do the NRIs communities understand the rights in the digital world? Is access to the Internet considered to be a right?
2) Which rights your NRIs communities find to be the most challenging and why?
3) Can we exercise our rights in the digital world? What do you see as a limitation?
4) How is the development of new technologies affecting our rights in the digital world, from the perspective of your NRI?
5) What are the recommendations/advises from your NRIs in approaching the identified problems? Can the multistakeholder model here be an effective approach for making improvements?
5. All representatives of the NRIs have been asked to comment on the proposed list of the guiding/policy questions. In addition, the NRIs were kindly asked to send a brief summary of the inputs that they will address on each of the proposed questions, for the purposes of knowing in advance among which NRIs the substantive intersections could be made.
6. From the Caribbean IGF, it was said that the 3rd question is the only one that does not explicitly refer that the inputs should come from the NRIs perspectives. Since the goal is to bring the NRIs perspectives at the IGF, it was advised to have this 3rd question reworded, so that it indicates that the inputs come from the perspectives of the NRIs.
7.  The IGF-USA thanked the Caribbean IGF for useful comments. It was said that some of the MAG members objected to the NRIs sessions, nothing that this is an important reason why each of the NRIs session should indicate that the perspectives are coming from the NRIs respective communities. Because of this, it was advised to add words “from the perspective of the NRIs” to the end of the proposed 3rd question.
8. The national IGF of Bolivia agreed with previous notes, and added that we should add ‘according to the NRIs, what do you see as limitations’ to the 3rd question.
9. The Portugal IGF expressed agreement with previous suggestions.
10. From the Nigerian and West African IGF it was as well noted that the question should remain as it is, with nothing that inputs are coming from the NRIs perspectives.
11. The Armenian IGF and SEEDIG noted their agreement as well. It was added that in the 3rd question, there should be a more neutral approach, and that part could ask if there are any limitations, and not imply that limitations exist in advance.
12. The present NRIs did not object to this suggestion. The IGF-USA added a note that we should look at how we advance the rights in the digital word. It was said that we should acknowledge that there are different barriers in different countries and regions. This is why leaving the word ’challenges’ and ‘limitations’ should remain in the questions.
13. From the Colombian IGF, it was noted that all questions should focus on the NRIs perspectives, as that is how we primarily align the session inputs. It is of utmost importance that all questions are focused on the NRIs perspectives. This is why the 3rd questions should have these words added.
14. A consensus was achieved that words ‘from your NRI perspectives’ should be added to the 3rd question.
15. From the UGF-USA, it was noted that on the 2ndguiding question, a potential rewording could be: ‘What are the rights that your NRIs communities find to be the most challenging and why?’
16. The Afghanistan IGF coordinator expressed agreement with the previous notes, and suggested that the order of the 3rd and 2nd questions be changed in a way that it joins the limitations segment to challenges and barriers. With this, it was advised to could keep the 1st question, and merge the second part of the 3rd questions with the 2nd questions. In the chat space, the coordinator suggested the newly proposed structure of the questions as it follows:
a) How do NRIs communities understand the rights in the digital world? Is access to the Internet considered to be a right?
b) Can we or how can we exercise our rights in digital world?
c) Which right your NRI communities find to be the most challenging and why? What do you see as limitations?
d) How is the development of new technologies affecting our rights in the digital world, from the perspective of your NRI?
e) What are the recommendations/advises from your NRIs in approaching the identified problems? Can the multistakeholder model here be an effective approach for making improvements?
17. From the Bolivia IGF an explicit agreement was expressed. It was noted that in the 2nd questions we could add the word ‘other’, so that it will read ‘can we exercise our other rights...’? It was advised to emphasize the word others, as it is important to elaborate on all other rights of priority.
18. From the China IGF, it was said that it is important that we elaborate on the NRIs understanding of the concept of rights in the digital world, and that under this elaboration, we could look at different rights and different related aspects.
19. From the Ecuador IGF, it was said that the NRIs should think about the types of rights they will develop their discussions around. This is manly related to the existence of the citizens and human rights. The right to access the ICTs can be seen as a citizen’s right, and also as a human right.
20. The Bolivia IGF noted that there are many specific rights, and that the NRIs should focus on discussing if the rights in the digital world should be different than in the offline world. It was also said that access is the primary condition for exercising all other rights, and because of this it has to be reflected in the session.
21. One participant noted that elaboration on the concepts of rights in online and offline rights is important to be addressed.
22. The IGF-USA agreed that a distinction between the human rights and civil rights should be made.
23. A proposal for the new structure of the questions was added, so that the first question stands as the primary heading, and under that the NRIs should elaborate on which rights are the most challenging and if the access to the Internet should be considered as a right.
24. With this, a consensus based view was called on the following proposal: to have the first question be related to the understanding of the concept of the rights; followed by the rights the NRIs think of as the most challenging with elaborations about the access as the potential right; this section will be followed by the question on the potential limitations the NRIs see, and concluded with the 4th and 5th proposed questions related to the role of the new technologies and the multistakeholder approach.
25. It was agreed that this new proposal will be shared with all the NRIs, for achieving the final consensus among everyone.
26. In regard to the session format, it was advised that each of the NRIs does not have to elaborate on each of the proposed five guiding questions. The NRIs should think about prioritizing the aspects they would like to elaborate on, and for the sake of effective use of time, we should make a schedule of speakers based on the NRIs inputs. Among the speakers for each of the five questions, there should be a regional balance.
27. It was underlined by some of the NRIs that this session should stream to have synergies and interconnections between the NRIs. Because of this, it was advised that all participants should meet with the co-moderators, and focus on the points of priorities across the questions.
28. From the Armenian IGF and SEEDIG, it was advised to make needed calculations of time allocations for speakers, in order to have everyone be treated equally. There should be a dialogue between all. A chance for a follow up comments of the NRIs speakers, should be possible.
29. It was agreed to seek for additional inputs from the NRIs on this via the NRIs mailing list.
30. The Host asked for inputs on when the floor for comments should be open during the session.
31. From the IGF-USA is was said that the NRIs should motivate the audience to come back to the session room, after the 2 hours long lunch break that will split the session. This is why it was suggested to have the floor be opened during the second segment of the session, with having the rapporteurs deliver key points summarized from the first segment.
32. There were no objections expressed to the above proposal.
33. There were additional suggestions from the IGF-USA to potentially limit the Q&A section to 20 minutes.
34. The Host asked the participants to propose names for two online moderators and rapporeturs. It was agreed that there should be an open call sent to the NRIs mailing list to ask for a maximum of five rapporteurs that could cover the perspectives on each of the five guiding questions, and at least one online moderators. A representative of the ICANN Wiki volunteered to be an online moderator.
35. Regarding the status of the NRIs Collaborative Sessions it was agreed that there should be a separate call on this subject, open to everyone.
36. As for the NRIs joint booth, the Secretariat was asked to share the related logistics, as well as inputs on the development of the NRIs info material, and the schedule for the booth captains. All participants were informed that the IGF Village will be placed at the 2nd floor of the E building of the Palais des Nations. It was added that each booth consists of one simple table, three chairs and a panel backdrop behind the table.
37. The coordinator of the Nigeria and West Africa IGF volunteered to be the booth captain. Some other participants also expressed interest and the Host said that these will be addressed in the NRIs booth schedule, to be sent to the NRIs list.
38. The IGFSA member of the executive committee, present at the call, said that the funding for outreach will most probably be used for printing the NRIs info material: a 4-info pager, a poster and if needed, for renting a screen. 
39. On the potential bilateral meetings with other interested international and intergovernmental organizations, that expressed interest to meet the NRIs, it was agreed that the Secretariat will create a list of these and share with the NRIs for further planning.
 Next Steps
40.  A full summary report will be sent to the NRIs mailing list.
41.  The IGF Secretariat will adjust the set of policy/guiding questions to the inputs from this call, and invite all NRIs to review it and add their suggestions.
42.  The list of the interested organizations for having bilateral meetings with the NRIs will be shared with the NRIs list, for further planning.
43. An open call for suggesting the moderators and rapporteurs will be sent to the list, as well as the invitation for planning the call dedicated to the NRIs collaborative sessions.
44.  Next meeting: The Secretariat will distribute the Doodle poll for the members of the NRIs to cast the votes for the best time slots for the next virtual meeting, via the NRIs mailing list.
45.  For any suggestions or questions regarding the Report, kindly contact the IGF Secretariat, NRIs Focal Point at: [email protected].



National and Regional IGF Initiatives (NRIs)
AGENDA: Virtual Meeting XIV, 13 November 2017, at 14:30 p.m. UTC
1) Introduction
2) Discussing the guiding/policy questions for the NRIs Main Session
3) Proposing the online moderator and rapporteurs for the NRIs Main Session
4) AoB


MEETING PARTICIPANTS (in alphabetical order, from both meeting):

1) Baudouin Schombe, IGF The Democratic Republic of Congo
2) Carlos Vera, IGF Ecuador
3) Dustin Phillips, ICANN Wiki
4) Eduardo Santoyo, IGF Colombia
5) Fotjon Kosta, IGF Albania
6) Imran Shah, IGF Pakistan
7) Judith Hellerstein, IGF-USA
8) Julian Casasbuenas G., IGF Colombia
9) Lianna Galstyan, IGF Armenia and SEEDIG
10) Maheeshwara Kirindigoda, IGF Sri Lanka
11) Maria Luisa Ferreira, IGF Portugal
12) Marilyn Cade, IGF-USA
13) Mary Uduma, IGF Nigeria and West Africa IGF
14) Michel TCHONANG LINZE, IGF Cameroon
15) Nigel Cassimire, Caribbean IGF
16) Oksana Prykhodko, Ukraine IGF
17) Omar Mansoor Ansari, IGF Afghanistan
18) Roberto Zambrana, IGF Bolivia
19) Sandra Hoferichter, EuroDIG
20) Tian Luo, IGF China
21) Tracy Hackshaw, IGF Trinidad and Tobago
22) Ying Chu Chen, observer
23) Zoraida Frias, IGF Spain




Contact Information

United Nations
Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)

Villa Le Bocage
Palais des Nations,
CH-1211 Geneva 10

igf [at] un [dot] org
+41 (0) 229 173 411