By Javier Surasky
After 18
months of work and four drafts of a Global Digital Compact (GDC) text that
failed to gain consensus approval from the UN Member States, the
co-facilitators of the preparation process for this document, permanent
representatives of Sweden and Zambia to the United Nations, submitted a letter
to the President of the General Assembly presenting a "revised text"
of the GDC which, in their words, "reflects the additional commitments
reached."
In their
note, dated September 9, 2024, the co-facilitators assure that the text
reflects the collective efforts and aspirations of all parties involved, which
they present as "a solid foundation for the future of global digital
cooperation."
To be
clear: the co-facilitators understood that they could no longer contribute to
achieving a text that could be considered acceptable by all States, and
therefore, Member States will come to the Summit of the Future without a
consensus GDC text, subject to last-minute negotiations, and that may
eventually need to be adopted by voting.
It is, of
course, the realization of news that, while expected, is still a terrible sign.
The revised
text (GDC.RT) has changed in only one paragraph compared to the one placed
under silence procedure on August 27, which received observations in more than
20 paragraphs by several countries, a topic we addressed in a recent entry on this same blog, which allows us
to imagine that its adoption during the Summit will not be a process free of
obstacles.
The
novelties brought by the GDC.RT is in paragraph 29(d), located within objective
3 of "fostering an inclusive, open, secure and protected digital space
that respects, protects and promotes human rights," and particularly
within its subsection on "internet governance," which is severely
curtailed. All reference to positive actions aimed at limiting the application
of restrictions on internet access has been removed, leaving only a negative
measure expressed as a general call for States not to carry out
"shutdowns" of the network or take measures that affect access to it:
Consequently,
paragraph 29(d) of the revised text establishes the commitment to " Refrain
from Internet shutdowns and measures that target Internet access” [deleting the
following sentence: “and ensure that any
restrictions on access to Internet services and freedom of expression are in
accordance with international law, including with national legislation
compliant with international law "].
There is a
second change, merely formal, in paragraph 31(f), which is also under objective
3, but in the subsection referring to "digital trust and security."
Here, only an adjustment is made by changing the word "child abuse"
to "child exploitation" in the final part of the text to align it
with the first part. The commitment is then to "Monitor and review digital
platform policies and practices on countering child sexual exploitation and
abuse which occurs through or is amplified by the use of technology, including
distribution over digital platforms of child sexual abuse or child sexual exploitation material, as well as
solicitation or grooming for the purpose of committing a sexual offense against
a child.”
Too many
unresolved issues must be discussed and agreed upon before adopting the Global
Digital Compact by consensus, which now appears to be a distant possibility.
I hope to
be wrong, but it seems to me that the Summit of the Future has begun to fail
before convening. Considering multilateralism's recent path, what will likely
follow is leaving the most complex issues to be resolved at a future meeting
(the second World Summit on Social Development in 2025?) and the adoption of a
weak Global Digital Compact by voting, followed by cross-accusations between
different countries and groups of countries for the negotiating intransigence
that each part will identify in the others.
Meanwhile,
digital technologies continue to advance, benefiting few in an international
framework of uncontrolled risks and discourses not paired by a willingness to
act.
