Session
Organizer 1: Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Organizer 2: Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Organizer 3: Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Organizer 2: Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Organizer 3: Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 1: María Camila Galvis Gomez, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 2: Abed Kataya, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 3: Hanane Boujemi, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Verengai Mabika, Technical Community, African Group
Speaker 5: Stephanie Borg Psaila, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Abed Kataya, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 3: Hanane Boujemi, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Verengai Mabika, Technical Community, African Group
Speaker 5: Stephanie Borg Psaila, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Format
Roundtable
Duration (minutes): 90
Format description: A roundtable format fosters interactive dialogue and encourages equal participation from speakers and attendees, making it ideal for a session that seeks to explore practical strategies rather than just present findings. A 90-minute session allows for in-depth discussion, case study presentations, and audience engagement while still being flexible enough to adapt to a 60-minute format if needed. This structure ensures that both online and in-person participants can actively contribute, which is indispensable for all participation, but especially for substantive civil society engagement. The session will incorporate structured interventions from speakers, followed by an open discussion, ensuring a balance between expert insights and audience contributions.
Duration (minutes): 90
Format description: A roundtable format fosters interactive dialogue and encourages equal participation from speakers and attendees, making it ideal for a session that seeks to explore practical strategies rather than just present findings. A 90-minute session allows for in-depth discussion, case study presentations, and audience engagement while still being flexible enough to adapt to a 60-minute format if needed. This structure ensures that both online and in-person participants can actively contribute, which is indispensable for all participation, but especially for substantive civil society engagement. The session will incorporate structured interventions from speakers, followed by an open discussion, ensuring a balance between expert insights and audience contributions.
Policy Question(s)
(i) How can internet governance frameworks move beyond performative consultation and ensure meaningful civil society participation?
(ii) What strategies have been successful in enabling CSOs to transition from advocacy to real decision-making power?
(iii) How can CSOs form strategic alliances with academia, media, and international organisations to strengthen their influence in internet governance?
What will participants gain from attending this session? Participants will formulate practical strategies to challenge token participation and assert real decision-making power in internet governance. Drawing on real-world case studies from the LATAM and MENA regions, this session will provide actionable tactics, including:
(i) Recognising and challenging performative consultation processes – how CSOs can identify when they are being included for optics rather than influence.
(ii) Successful legal and policy interventions – insights from cases such as Jordan’s cybercrime law negotiations and Brazil’s civil society-driven internet governance.
(iii) Building strategic alliances – how collaborations with academia, media, and international institutions have strengthened civil society’s influence.
(iv) Pathways from advocacy to governance – lessons from community-led internet infrastructure projects in Argentina and Mexico, which bypassed restrictive policies and monopolies.
With diverse regional perspectives, this session will ensure participants leave with insights that can be adapted to their own and wider digital governance landscapes.
SDGs
Description:
CSOs are frequently invited to policy discussions, yet their role often remains symbolic rather than substantive. While multistakeholderism is widely championed, CSOs often find themselves engaged in processes that lack transparency, accountability, and real influence. Governments and private sector actors frequently set the agenda, while CSOs provide input without the power to shape final decisions. Consultation mechanisms are often performative rather than transformative, leaving CSOs with little leverage to influence laws, regulations, or infrastructure projects that impact human rights and digital equity. Drawing on case studies from the LATAM and MENA regions, developed by the Civil Society Alliances for Digital Empowerment (CADE), this session examines concrete examples of how CSOs have sought to move beyond token consultation, highlighting best and worst practices: (i) Legal interventions: In MENA, cybercrime laws are frequently drafted with minimal CSO involvement, yet are used to criminalise dissent, expand surveillance, and restrict digital freedoms. Despite this, CSOs have successfully challenged provisions – such as in Jordan, where sustained advocacy delayed a more repressive cybercrime bill. (ii) Community-driven infrastructure: In LATAM, the private sector dominates internet access discussions, sidelining grassroots initiatives. However, community-led internet networks – such as in Argentina and Mexico, where indigenous groups established independent broadband networks – offer a model for bypassing restrictive policies and monopolies. (iii) Alternative governance models: In Tunisia, CSOs played a key role in shaping digital rights policy post-2011 (even though they have have since been excluded from significant decisions). Conversely, sustained pressure in Brazil led to the inclusion of CSOs in key internet governance processes, such as Marco Civil. Rather than diagnosing the problem, this session will explore lived strategies and generate actionable insights into how CSOs can challenge token participation and build real decision-making influence.
CSOs are frequently invited to policy discussions, yet their role often remains symbolic rather than substantive. While multistakeholderism is widely championed, CSOs often find themselves engaged in processes that lack transparency, accountability, and real influence. Governments and private sector actors frequently set the agenda, while CSOs provide input without the power to shape final decisions. Consultation mechanisms are often performative rather than transformative, leaving CSOs with little leverage to influence laws, regulations, or infrastructure projects that impact human rights and digital equity. Drawing on case studies from the LATAM and MENA regions, developed by the Civil Society Alliances for Digital Empowerment (CADE), this session examines concrete examples of how CSOs have sought to move beyond token consultation, highlighting best and worst practices: (i) Legal interventions: In MENA, cybercrime laws are frequently drafted with minimal CSO involvement, yet are used to criminalise dissent, expand surveillance, and restrict digital freedoms. Despite this, CSOs have successfully challenged provisions – such as in Jordan, where sustained advocacy delayed a more repressive cybercrime bill. (ii) Community-driven infrastructure: In LATAM, the private sector dominates internet access discussions, sidelining grassroots initiatives. However, community-led internet networks – such as in Argentina and Mexico, where indigenous groups established independent broadband networks – offer a model for bypassing restrictive policies and monopolies. (iii) Alternative governance models: In Tunisia, CSOs played a key role in shaping digital rights policy post-2011 (even though they have have since been excluded from significant decisions). Conversely, sustained pressure in Brazil led to the inclusion of CSOs in key internet governance processes, such as Marco Civil. Rather than diagnosing the problem, this session will explore lived strategies and generate actionable insights into how CSOs can challenge token participation and build real decision-making influence.
Expected Outcomes
The expected outcomes are:
(i) A policy brief summarising strategies for meaningful CSO engagement in governance processes.
(ii) Follow-up discussions among participating organisations to explore collaborative advocacy initiatives.
(iii) Participants forming and joining a knowledge-sharing network connecting CSOs across regions to exchange best practices and tactics (the in situ booth will complement the session as a face-to-face focal exchange point).
The insights and recommendations generated will feed into ongoing discussions within multistakeholder internet governance processes and be shared with relevant policymakers and advocacy groups.
Hybrid Format: The session will use:
(i) Live Q&A with a dedicated online moderator, ensuring virtual participants’ contributions are addressed in real-time.
(ii) Interactive chat discussions to gather input from online attendees (led by the same experienced online moderator)
(iii) A shared online document for collective note-taking and feedback.