India’s Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has opposed ICANN’s raised concerns about how regional bodies manage and distribute Internet addresses, emphasizing the need for a more equitable governance model. As the global body overseeing the Domain Name System (DNS), ICANN’s proposals are central to ongoing discussions about evolving Internet governance frameworks, with India advocating for changes that reflect the interests of all stakeholders, especially nations from the Global South.
The concern arises when in October 2024, ICANN opened a comment period on its Internet Coordination Policy 2 (ICP-2), which sets the criteria for recognizing new Regional Internet Registries (RIRs). These RIRs play a critical role in managing the allocation and registration of IP addresses within their respective regions. A key point of contention in ICP-2 is a clause that grants significant decision-making authority to the Number Resource Organisation-Executive Council (NRO EC). This council, made up of the five existing RIRs, would have the power to propose the recognition or derecognition of new RIRs, subject to ICANN’s approval.
India has raised concerns regarding this proposal, highlights a lack of transparency in ICANN’s decision-making processes, stronger accountability, stresses the importance of global representation, advocating for a more inclusive governance structure that gives equitable voice to nations from the Global South. These reforms, India believes, are essential to ensure a fair and representative future for global internet governance.
Why It Matters:
The outcome of this debate holds significant importance as it will shape the future of global internet governance, influencing how the internet is managed, regulated, and governed worldwide. As a major player in the global digital economy, India’s stance carries considerable weight, with far-reaching implications for the country’s digital growth, security, and its role in shaping international internet policies.
What India Demands:
India has called for a revision of ICANN’s proposal to address its key concerns, including the need for greater transparency, accountability, and global representation. The government stresses the importance of adopting a multistakeholder approach to Internet governance, one that actively involves governments, civil society, and the private sector.
Instead of granting power to the NRO EC, MeitY has recommended a more inclusive, multi-stakeholder approach to recognising new RIRs. The Indian government has urged ICANN to involve its broader community in developing the evaluation process for new RIRs. This approach would help ensure that decision-making is fair, transparent, and not dominated by any group.
MeitY also suggested that ICANN establish an independent body to assess new RIR proposals. Such a body would ensure that the process remains transparent and balanced, helping to build trust among stakeholders and minimise any bias in the system.
India’s Concerns on Amendments and Derecognition of RIRs
India has voiced reservations about the proposed rules for amending ICP-2 and the process for derecognizing Regional Internet Registries (RIRs). The draft policy requires unanimous approval from all existing RIRs for any amendments, a condition India argues grants excessive control to these entities. While acknowledging the importance of involving RIRs, India stressed that no single registry or group should hold veto power.
The proposal, which is believed to shift governance dynamics or increase the role of specific stakeholders, has raised apprehensions about fairness, accountability, and its alignment with national interests. As a key player in the global Internet ecosystem, India has consistently advocated for a more inclusive, multilateral approach to internet governance, one that ensures equal representation of nations in decision-making processes