PROPOSALS FOR ITU PLENIPOT OUTLINE COMPETING REFORM PLANS

Several reform-related issues are teed up for discussion. Fourteen European countries and Australia have proposed revisiting ITU Constitution and Convention, one of 2 treaties underlying union. European countries want to shift control of ITU telecom sector (ITU-T) to nontreaty World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (WTSA). That, they say, would give WTSA “greater flexibility to review and enhance the organization of the work of [the ITU-T] to ensure that it meets the requirements of those participating in the work, and to maintain ITU-T as a viable organ for efficient standardization.” Industry source said thrust of what the Europeans were seeking was that work done by that sector be separated from more traditional ITU role to hand more control over standards-setting to private sector operators.

Submission by Inter-American Telecom Commission (CITEL), which U.S. signed, said regional group “strongly’ believed sector “should not become an entity apart from the current structure of the ITU.” Submission acknowledged that various blueprints were on table going into Plenipot for changing how standardization activities were conducted. ITU-T “should continue to operate as a sector of the ITU to ensure, inter alia, that global telecommunication standardization activities are carried out in a nonduplicative manner as might be the case if the ITU-T were structurally removed from the ITU,” it said.

U.S. views Constitution and Convention “as permanent instruments not to be rewritten with each passing cycle,” its proposal says. However, it says, ITU should take advantage of opportunity to improve its functioning and ability to meet needs of its members in rapidly evolving telecom environment. U.S. is urging Plenipot to craft process for ITU planning activities (strategic, financial and operational) and to develop schedule that clarifies relationships among them.

Several submissions address makeup of ITU Council, 46- member elected body that oversees ITU policy and administrative matters between Plenipots, which are held every 4 years. Because of complexity involved in changing Council’s tasks and roles, European countries said, Council should “oversee the production of a detailed set of proposals” for consideration at 2006 Plenipot. U.S., on other hand, offered proposals to increase Council’s role in initiating and coordinating strategic planning among sectors and ITU General Secretariat.

Whether sector members should be allowed to attend Council meetings as observers has emerged as another key issue. ITU reform working group recommended sector members have observer status and right to participate actively in Council’s Standing Committee on Finance, but without right to vote. U.S. favors inclusion in principle but is awaiting further study on how it would be implemented. Senegal, which filed extensive comments on many Plenipot issues, said it supported working group recommendation.

Several countries are pushing for greater participation by ITU in international telecom and Internet domain naming and addressing policy matters. U.S. isn’t party to those proposals but will review them, NTIA Dir. Nancy Victory told us last week (CD Sept 16 p2).

Common proposals submitted by 8 Arab states outlined some of “diverging priorities” of ITU members between industrialized countries and other parts of world. Set of proposals by Algeria, Egypt, Kuwait, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen notes that last Plenipot meeting in Minneapolis in 1998 asked 2002 conference to examine possibility of creating ITU forum for development of technical standards. Arab document said ITU’s T Sector dealt with technical standards related to equipment and networks of interest to industry, as well as services and tariffs, of interest to telecom regulators. Many industrialized nations have left development and financing of technical standards to private sector, proposal said. “They therefore wish to give their [private] Sector members, in the ITU, more power in the development and adoption of technical standards,” Arab proposal said. “Many Arab countries are mainly consumers of standards and therefore the study and adoption of technical standards by ITU may be of a secondary priority to them. This difference in the interest of standards has consequences on the other activities of ITU. Consequently, a review of the function and structure of the ITU has to take account of the somewhat diverging priorities of its membership.” Industry source said submission by Arab states “takes the position that we have given the private sector enough and we have to get more clear on what our responsibilities are as member states in what is an intergovernmental organization.”

Arab proposal says current ITU structure, which was modified at 1998 Plenipot, “greatly improved the rights of sector members. Increasing them more would lead to reconsidering the intergovernmental character of the union.” Question of rights of private sector members is “definitively resolved” for now, proposal said. Proposal did suggest that Plenipot restructure ITU Constitution and Convention to make clear distinctions between activities that were treaty-based, those limited to member states and others that had overlaps for both govt. and private sector members. Such change would affect only Radiocommunication Sector, since those distinctions already have been made for Standardization and Development Sectors, proposal said. It would make clear that all treaty-related work was within control of member states with “minimal contributions” by sector members, one industry source said.

Other proposals cite concerns over growing divide between telecom infrastructure of developing countries and that of developed countries. Republic of Guinea called that “huge disparity,” particularly for new information and communication technologies, “which are developing more rapidly in the more prosperous countries. Therefore if suitable action is not taken in time, the gap between developed and developing countries will widen still further.” To help fund telecom and data networks in developing countries, Guinea suggested that “at least” 60% of the surplus income the ITU received from its Telecom conferences, which are held every 4 years, be earmarked for that purpose. Indonesia raised similar concerns. It proposed that “substantial resources” be made available to ITU Development Sector, particularly its Telecommunication Development Bureau (usually known by its French acronym BDT). It suggested that BDT be “rapidly decentralized” by giving regional offices more autonomy to make decisions and address needs of individual countries.

Australia proposed redistribution of decision-making power in ITU to extend “the benefits of telecommunications technologies to all the world’s inhabitants.” It also recommended giving more authority to ITU’s Development Sector, in part by creating Telecommunication Development Regulations within administrative rules to allow that sector “to govern its own rules and procedures for the first time.” Proposal said it was based on the premise that the ITU must maintain “high-level principles, objectives and strategies” for all ITU sectors as treaty-level commitments. “Australia proposes that the role of member states remain central and without compromise,” the submission said.