We depend on information and communications technologies to advance human rights, peace, and development. More and more, we also struggle to live with dignity in this wired world, reliant as we are on channels and platforms that can seem better built for amplifying division and intolerance than raising awareness and good conscience. By convening in open and inclusive forums like the Internet Governance Forum, we break the walls between conversations and work towards a common language to understand and address the challenges of the digital age.

Just as climate debates must start from accepting we have no "Planet B" or alternative to Earth, internet governance discussions must hold top of mind the goal of one global, interconnected, interdependent, open, and secure network of networks. All the internet, for all people, all the time.

We bring one stakeholder's perspective. In our daily work at Access Now, we see civil society under attack. Our Digital Security Helpline works with individuals and organizations around the world to keep them safe online. We provide preventive support, helping to assess threats and keep people safe from harm. We provide rapid response services, reacting to attacks in real time.

The numbers of clients and requests seeking our interventions climbs each year. We see the percentage of reactionary cases, where something has already gone wrong, outnumbering preventive cases, and the divide is growing. The internet is not secure, least of all for civil society, including human rights defenders.

But it’s not just the cyber attacks on civil society that causes concern. It is the onslaught of ill-conceived public policy, regulations, and laws emerging in countries across the globe that are securitizing the internet, criminalizing speech and violating our rights to privacy.

What role can and do multi-stakeholder convenings play? The actors delivering abuse and spreading disinformation use the very same channels and platforms upon which we construct the information society. We are not apart, but inextricably linked. We craft the policies and architectures, or influence their design, in ways that potentially enable these harms, while also forging a path toward the knowledge society. The builders, designers, and constructors must hear from those most at risk ⎼ the reason we fully support the High Level Panel's exhortation that no one be left behind.

We have various and growing forums to express these grievances and form stronger bonds, including our very own RightsCon. At the national and global levels, governments as well as companies are setting up exchanges and adjudication bodies to facilitate open dialogue and accountability. Yet none has the imprimatur of the UN Secretary General nor the legacy of broad participation by governments of small, medium, and large nations that the IGF enjoys. These increasingly specialized forums, whether focused on cybersecurity, corporate-level policies, must be exposed to wider audiences, and work to properly engage civil society ⎼ the reason we support the Panel's work toward coordination and mapping of processes.

But norms must become real: implemented robustly and observed with accountability. Now we must expand internet access to the rest of the world’s population and enhance rights-respecting digital security across vulnerable populations. We must keep a close eye on the perils of digital identity and call for transparency across the algorithm and machine learning. We must resource civil society that is overtaxed and under attack, struggling to participate in every new forum and body. The IGF is useful for centralizing our efforts and providing us as civil society and all other stakeholders with a platform to address the governance challenges that have not yet even become apparent.