Opinion of the Committee of the Regions — Internet Policy and Governance
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: Internet, data protection, digitisation, exchange of information, governance, international cooperation, local authority, personal data, regional authority








C_2015019EN.01006501.xml










21.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/65





Opinion of the Committee of the Regions — Internet Policy and Governance
(2015/C 019/14)












Rapporteur



Odeta Žerlauskienė (LT/ALDE), Member of Skuodas District Municipal Council





Reference document



Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on internet Policy and Governance: Europe’s role in shaping the future of internet Governance
COM(2014) 72 final









POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS








1.


points out that, as a global information area, the internet is an inseparable part of modern society and has become a public resource, therefore its proper functioning is a matter of international public interest;












2.


welcomes the current processes to strengthen international internet governance and in particular the steps taken by the United States government, which has played a key role during the development of the internet, to promote transition to comprehensive global internet governance;












3.


calls for the European Union to be actively involved in the process of developing global internet governance, in order to consolidate and strengthen its role as an exemplary and responsible actor; therefore welcomes the Commission’s initiative in publishing a Communication on internet policy and governance in order to clarify the EU’s role in global internet governance policy, as well as European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker’s declared objective of creating a digital single market and a unified digital agenda;





VALUES-RELATED ASPECTS OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE POLICY









4.


emphasises that the development of the internet as a technology-based area of human coexistence and data exchange, is inseparable from the values underpinning human relations, and therefore the EU’s role in policies on improving the internet is cannot be separated from its fundamental values;












5.


therefore underlines that the European approach towards the future of the internet shall be based on the principles of freedom, openness and neutrality;












6.


emphasises the importance of the internet as a medium for maintaining and promoting cultural diversity, which is one of the European Union’s fundamental values (1); therefore its role in internet governance policy must continue to reflect, preserve and promote cultural and linguistic diversity;












7.


endorses the European Commission’s view that multi-stakeholder processes relating to the internet must be consistent with fundamental rights, as well as meeting these requirements: transparency (possibility for all stakeholders to participate), inclusiveness and balance (those responsible must provide all stakeholders with every possible opportunity to participate), and accountability (commitment to regularly report on own activities to all stakeholders) (2);












8.


refers to the current debate on the issue of whether internet access should be recognised as a human right, with decisions to this effect by various countries including EU Member States (3), and to the contrary view that the internet is only a technology enabling the enjoyment of fundamental rights (4); recommends declaring internet use as an inalienable civic right, which national, local and regional authorities can help to enforce within their remits;












9.


points out that a broad interpretation is needed of the guidelines for internet development set out in the 2005 Tunis Agenda for the Information Society (5), according to which governments, the private sector and civil society should play a part in internet governance (point (34); this certainly does not only refer to national governments, but also shall include local and regional authorities, as the level closest to each citizen;












10.


points out that the more than 1 00  000 local and regional authorities representing the 28 EU Member States’ tier of sub-national governance are key internet policy players, not only as developers of internet content but also in relation to improving internet access; in view of this, they should be given adequate scope for direct involvement at both national and European level in the process of formulating a European position on global internet governance policy issues;












11.


emphasises that the EU’s strategy on internet governance policy could be an effective means of creating an attractive overall image of the EU globally and raising the EU’s profile as a key actor in shaping internet policy and defining global standards for good policy practices;





A COMMON APPROACH TO INTERNET GOVERNANCE









12.


notes that there are only minor differences in approaches to internet governance at international level (as reflected in the Tunis Agenda, the conclusions of the NETmundial conference (6), the OECD declaration and the conclusions of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) (7)). This implies that a global consensus on internet governance is emerging;












13.


emphasises the current relevance of the approach to the future of the internet set out in the Tunis Agenda, summarised in the acronym COMPACT. According to this, the internet is as a space of Civic responsibilities, One unfragmented resource governed via a Multi-stakeholder approach to Promote democracy and human rights, based on a sound technological Architecture that engenders Confidence and facilitates a Transparent governance both of the underlying internet infrastructure and of the services which run on top of it. Formulation of an European position should be guided by this approach;












14.


welcomes the American government’s commitment to reform allocation of top-level domains (ccTLD), with a move away from unilateral allocation embodied by ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) und IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority) to a model based on global partnership; therefore, in line with the conclusions of the April 2014 global multi-stakeholder conference on the future of internet governance, calls for full implementation of this initiative;












15.


welcomes the European Commission’s initiative to develop a Global internet Policy Observatory (GIPO). This global platform will bring together all stakeholders, and is envisaged as a global online medium for developing and regulating internet policy and coordinating technological innovation;












16.


welcomes the Commission’s approach, which considers the future GIPO as a global resource in which individual participants or stakeholders will not be able to impose their will on others; calls on all stakeholders, and local and regional authorities in particular, to participate in the relevant consultative processes on internet governance issues;












17.


emphasises that the fundamental principle of net neutrality must not be called into question in discussions on the future of the internet, regardless of the values invoked by individual stakeholders;












18.


welcomes the Commission’s intention announced in communication COM(2014) 72 to review risks of conflicts of laws and jurisdictions in relation to the internet, and develop an EU response mechanism;





TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE









19.


insists on continuing to apply the internet standards defined by the existing technical expert structure based on the internet Engineering Task Force;












20.


welcomes efforts by technical circles to establish principles for defining specifications taking into account topical issues such as protecting privacy at protocol level, embedding options for multilingual domain names and improving accessibility for persons with disabilities; also appreciates the progress made by the EU when translating these achievements into legal acts (8);












21.


given the differing interests of individual countries and their differing capacities to secure those interests, emphasises the challenges facing the EU in negotiations on the future of internet regulation and therefore stresses that the subsidiarity principle must not be ignored in negotiations on unified EU provisions on the future of the internet;












22.


emphasises the vital importance of cooperation between public and private sectors on ensuring a reliable and efficient internet, especially given that most networks and information systems are privately operated; argues that businesses should not incur any further costs through this cooperation;












23.


underlines the importance of network infrastructure, and in particular broadband network infrastructure, in ensuring that the internet functions smoothly, and calls on Member States to cooperate with local and regional authorities on ensuring maximum internet coverage, in terms of regional coverage and universal accessibility;












24.


indicates the importance of comprehensive vertical partnership in exploiting possibilities, provided by current ERDF provisions, namely those related to the improvement of access, use and quality of information and communication technologies by extending broadband and high-speed networks and supporting the adoption of emerging technologies and networks for the digital economy, thus boosting the digital potential of Europe’s regions and the EU as a whole;












25.


is strongly opposed to censorship of the internet, regardless of its intended purpose; however, also points out that coordination of appropriate efforts is needed to prevent the internet from degenerating into a medium for extremist, radical or criminal activities, and in order to protect the rights of the most vulnerable population groups;





USING THE INTERNET TO IMPROVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND STRENGTHEN LOCAL DEMOCRACY









26.


points out that public institutions, including local and regional authorities, should set the standard for a policy of safe and responsible internet use. By way of their actions and their exemplary role they can and should encourage innovative and resource-efficient technological development with a minimal environmental impact;












27.


points out that public institutions, including local and regional authorities, can and should be pioneers in building a secure internet and setting high standards for its responsible use, for example by ensuring adequate protection of confidential personal data (which includes deleting data that are no longer needed for a specific purpose) or tackling cybercrime and putting in place the conditions for its prevention, including appropriate protection of ICT systems;












28.


emphasises the internet’s potential as a medium for providing public services, and calls on EU local and regional authorities to speed up the transfer of administrative services to the digital sphere; also calls on the Member States to put in place the requisite legal basis for this to happen;












29.


calls on the EU’s local and regional authorities to make wider use of the internet’s potential to operate more effectively and transparently while becoming closer to the grassroots, as well as by getting more actively involved in formulating national and European positions on the future of the internet;












30.


in this connection, particularly highlights the opportunities afforded by secure e-identification for citizens to amend their own registration data, and for regions in the EU Member States to introduce electronic voting;





LOCAL AND REGIONAL AUTHORITIES AND SECURITY ONLINE









31.


given that the internet has become an essential aspect of business, administration and private life, points out that the need to ensure security and integrity of internet content and infrastructure is something that concerns all stakeholders;












32.


points out that, with a growing number of internet users and the emergence of new technologies, abuse is becoming more widespread and having a more serious impact. Even local and regional authorities in the EU’s Member States, with their active involvement in shaping the internet community, access to highly sophisticated internet infrastructure and high-profile position in society, often fall prey to cyber attacks;












33.


notes that, while information and communication technologies help bring people together and enable them to exchange information, experiences and knowledge, they are unfortunately also often used for criminal purposes; therefore calls on the Member States and international organisations to use all possible means of combating cybercrime, and to work together with other stakeholders to create a general environment of zero tolerance for cybercrime;












34.


notes that electronic media also enable other — often anonymous — activities that, while not always criminal (or not yet classed as such), do offend the human dignity of others; therefore calls for particular attention to be paid to preventing cyberbullying and other risks that may be found on the internet and that especially affect the rights of children and young people as well as other vulnerable social groups;












35.


therefore emphasises that the internet can only succeed if the issue of its security is resolved; offers its support for the Commission’s ambition expressed by Neelie Kroes of making Europe the world’s safest online space (9); also calls on the Commission to look at internet security issues at the same time as internet governance;












36.


emphasises the importance of cooperation between all Member States and external partners on combating cybercrime and resolving network and information security issues, not least in relation to implementation of decisions which have already been adopted (10) and inclusion of these measures in the EU’s common strategy on internet governance policy;












37.


emphasises the need for effective national measures to investigate cybercrime and for European mechanisms supporting responses to such threats;












38.


notes that, in relation to privacy, which is a human right, the strategy on global internet governance must sufficiently address the need for international rules on the requisition, use and storage of personal data, protection of such data from unlawful and accidental disclosure, and the loss, exchange and deletion of personal data stored in electronic data banks. Good practices in this field could be based on existing EU law (11);












39.


recommends that the EU formulate and defend at international level a clear position on the use of personal data online. This position should be based on Article 8 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (2010/C 83/02) and in particular on the principle of enabling individuals to decide for themselves which data they wish to hand over and which they do not, and, given the internet’s global character and the ample scope for abuse, requiring that the use of any personal data online must be restricted and should only be allowed for specific, carefully defined purposes that are known in advance;












40.


notes that major IT companies have repeatedly abused their structural power, illegally collecting and using users’ personal data for both commercial and political purposes; calls on the Commission to make efforts to ensure that such abuses are prevented worldwide;












41.


also emphasises that, when investigating responsibility for internet-related crime, it is very important to establish the principle that internet service providers cannot be held liable for content which they have not created themselves, but that this limited liability cannot be invoked as a reason for refusing legal requests for cooperation with law enforcement agencies, where judicial sanctions exist;












42.


emphasises the EU’s pioneering role in emergent internet governance structures as in many other areas; therefore, it can and must serve as a model for a global culture of responsible internet governance and use, thus helping to build a global internet culture.





Brussels, 4 December 2014.


The President of the Committee of the Regions

Michel LEBRUN




(1)  Article 3 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

(2)  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — internet Policy and Governance. Europe’s role in shaping the future of internet Governance; COM(2014) 72 final.

(3)  For example, in 2009 the French Constitutional Council recognised the right to internet access as a basic human right. A similar decision was taken at constitutional level in Greece. There have been other similar judgments and political declarations, e.g. in Costa Rica, Estonia, Finland, Spain and even at UN level.

(4)  For example, this is the view of Vinton Cerf, one of the internet’s founding fathers: Vinton Cerf, ‘Internet Access Is Not a Human Right’, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/opinion/internet-access-is-not-a-human-right.html

(5)  Tunis Agenda for the Information Society http://itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html

(6)  Declaration of the NETmundial multi-stakeholder conference of 24 April 2014, http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETmundial-Multistakeholder-Document.pdf

(7)  See Declaration of Principles. Building the Information Society: a global challenge in the new Millennium, http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html

(8)  See Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 of 25 October 2012 on European Standardisation, and Commission Decision of 28 November 2011 setting up the European Multistakeholder platform on ICT standardisation, 2011/C 349/04.

(9)  Statement by N. Kroes of 13 April 2014 following the EP vote on the Cyber Security Directive. Great news for cyber security in the EU: The EP successfully votes through the Network & Information Security (NIS) directive, European Commission — STATEMENT/14/68, 2014 03 13, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-14-68_en.htm

(10)  For example, see the proposal for a Directive concerning measures to ensure a high common level of network and information security across the Union, COM(2013) 48 final.

(11)  For example, see Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data.