What changed
The resolution now calls on the UN General Assembly to renew the IGF mandate, while shifting support from member states to the UN. #3#4 Adds a new paragraph urging member states and the Commission to secure a positive UN resolution for the IGF's future. #5 Expands rejection to include corporate-controlled internet and intergovernmental governance, and adds a recital on the EU digital strategy. #1#2#5 Other changes are wording: recitals reordered and rephrased, and paragraphs renumbered. #1#2#3#4
4 changes of substance, plus 1 wording-only. Each change below carries a one-line ✦ note from the same model. Written from the two texts only — read the highlighted passages before relying on it.
The changes to the text itself, in document order. Cover page, citations (“having regard to …”), standard resolution paragraphs and punctuation-only edits are left out — they are in “Show every difference”.
Change #2 Substance
Adds a new recital H referencing the joint communication on an international digital strategy, and moves paragraph 1 before the call for renewal.
1. States that the internet must be and must remain open, free, global, interoperable, reliable, secure and governed for all, by all;
H. whereas the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy entitled ‘An International Digital Strategy for the European Union’ underlines that the EU will continue to proactively defend the general availability and integrity of the internet as a global, interoperable network of networks, reflecting the importance of the multistakeholder model of internet governance;
2. Calls on the UN General Assembly to permanently renew the mandate of the IGF and to increase its resources and strengthen the multistakeholder model of internet governance;
1. States that the internet must be and must remain open, free, global, interoperable, reliable, secure and governed for all by all;
Change #3 Substance
Changes paragraph 3 to call on the UN General Assembly to permanently renew the IGF mandate and strengthen its resources, instead of calling on member states and EU institutions to support the IGF.
3.2. Calls on the Member States and the EUUN institutionsGeneral concernedAssembly to continue topermanently supportrenew the IGFmandate andof itsthe secretariatIGF, and to contribute to its development as an efficient and independent organisation capable of exercisingstrengthen its mandateresources and playing a part in the evolvingmultistakeholder model of internet governance;
Change #4 Substance
Moves the call for member states and EU institutions to support the IGF and its secretariat to paragraph 3, replacing the previous call for increased efforts.
4.3. Calls on the Member States and the CommissionEU toinstitutions increaseconcerned theirto effortscontinue to support athe positiveIGF outcomeand atits thesecretariat, UNand Generalto Assemblycontribute byto theits enddevelopment as an efficient and independent organisation capable of 2025,exercising asits regardsmandate and contributing to the futureevolving model of theinternet IGF;governance;
Change #5 Substance
Adds a new paragraph 4 calling on member states and the Commission to secure a positive outcome for the IGF through a UN resolution by end of year; also adds condemnation of corporate control and intergovernmental governance.
5. Considers that, although the IGF does not adopt formal conclusions, the EU has a responsibility to support this process and to raise the impact of these exchanges in policy discussions, as it offers a positive and concrete context for the shaping of the internet’s future on the basis of a multistakeholder approach;
4. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to increase their efforts to secure a positive outcome for the future of the IGF through a UN General Assembly resolution by the end of this year;
6. Stresses that Parliament intends to continue to participate in future IGF meetings with a substantial delegation, in order to contribute effectively to formulating an EU approach to the governance of the internet, together with the Member States and the Commission;
5. Considers that, although the IGF does not adopt formal conclusions, the EU’s responsibility is to support this process and to raise the issue of the impact of these exchanges in policy discussions, as the IGF offers a positive and specific context for shaping the internet’s future on the basis of a multistakeholder approach;
7. Stresses that fundamental freedoms and human rights are not negotiable and must be protected both online and offline; strongly rejects the idea of a state-controlled internet and mass surveillance of the internet;
6. Stresses that Parliament intends to continue to participate in future IGF meetings with a substantial delegation in order to contribute effectively to formulating an EU approach to the governance of the internet together with the Member States and the Commission;
8. Stresses the importance of addressing the digital divide and structural inequalities in access to the internet; considers affordable high-speed connectivity to be essential for an inclusive digital environment that leaves no one behind;
7. Stresses that fundamental freedoms and human rights are non-negotiable and must be protected both online and offline; strongly rejects the idea of a state- or corporate-controlled internet and mass surveillance on the internet;
9. Underlines the importance of preserving a single, open and interoperable internet as a global public resource and warns about any risk of fragmenting the internet;
8. Stresses the importance of addressing the digital divide and structural inequalities in accessing the internet; considers affordable high-speed connectivity to be essential for an inclusive digital environment that leaves no one behind;
9. Underlines the importance of preserving a single, open and interoperable internet as a global public resource and warns against and condemns any effort to fragment the internet or to replace multistakeholder governance with intergovernmental control;