From Margins to Mainstream: Comments on the WSIS+20 Elements Paper
Dr. Muhammad Shabbir
On 20 June 2025, the WSIS+20 Elements Paper was published as part of the WSIS+20 review process, outlining thematic priorities intended to guide negotiations ahead of the WSIS+20 High-Level Meeting in December 2025 and to inform the drafting of the forthcoming Zero Draft, which will consolidate stakeholder input into actionable proposals.
The position of IGF-DCAD (Internet Governance Forum — Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability) on the paper is that despite decades of advocacy, the persistent digital divide facing persons with disabilities is only mentioned tangentially throughout the WSIS+20 Elements Paper. Given that over 1.5 billion people globally live with disabilities, there must be a stronger, explicit commitment to digital accessibility woven into every thematic area, in line with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Sustainable Development Goals. Moreover, inclusion must be explicitly defined to encompass accessibility for persons with disabilities as a non-negotiable component of people-centred development, recognizing that people with lived experience of disability bring essential insights and expertise to digital governance.
In this context, outlined below are a set of specific comments from the IGF-DCAD, highlighting key areas where the Elements Paper must better address the needs and inclusion of persons with disabilities.
1. Participation & Capacity Building (paras 4–5, 77–81)
While the document emphasizes capacity building for developing countries, it overlooks targeted programs for persons with disabilities, who often face compounded barriers due to inaccessible education, training, and digital tools. It is essential to:
A. Fund and develop accessible training materials
Co-created with people with lived experience of disability.
B. Support organizations of persons with disabilities
To deliver digital skills programs.
C. Set diversity targets for disability representation
Including in the IGF Multistakeholder Advisory Group.
D. Create mentorship pathways
For persons with disabilities, leveraging the lived experience of disability to inform leadership development and participation in Internet governance.
E. Integrate disability indicators
Into capacity-building monitoring frameworks.
2. Digital Divides (paras 28–35)
Persistent digital divides cannot be effectively bridged without addressing accessibility barriers as a core cause of exclusion for persons with disabilities. The Elements Paper should call for:
A. Adoption of international accessibility standards
(e.g., WCAG 2.1/2.2).
B. Requirements for public and private digital service providers
To implement accessibility by design, informed by the perspectives of people with lived experience of disability.
3. Human Rights & Ethical Dimensions (paras 43–50)
The strong emphasis on protecting human rights online is commendable but must recognize the intersectionality of digital rights for persons with disabilities, including:
A. The right to accessible information and communication
As foundational to freedom of expression.
B. The heightened risks posed by emerging technologies
Such as artificial intelligence, which can exclude persons with disabilities through biased datasets or inaccessible design.
C. The prevalence of technology-enabled abuse
Specifically targeting persons with disabilities, including cyberbullying and exploitation.
D. The necessity of involving people with lived experience
Of disability in designing ethical safeguards to ensure new technologies respect and promote human rights.
4. Internet Governance & IGF (paras 57–64)
The IGF has long been an essential platform for advancing accessibility, including the work of the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability. The renewed IGF mandate must:
A. Explicitly include the promotion of accessibility
And participation of persons with disabilities as a core objective.
B. Prioritize practical measures
Such as travel fellowships, online accessibility features, and hybrid meeting accommodations to enable active participation of persons with disabilities.
C. Embed accessibility requirements
Into all IGF processes and structures, ensuring disability-inclusive leadership across national and regional Internet governance initiatives.
D. Encourage the appointment of people with lived experience
Of disability to leadership positions within the IGF’s governance structures, including NRIs, such as the Multistakeholder Advisory Group(s), to ensure their authentic representation.
5. Artificial Intelligence (paras 70–76)
Artificial intelligence presents both opportunities and serious risks for persons with disabilities. It is vital to:
A. Embed accessibility guidelines
In artificial intelligence development standards.
B. Include organizations of persons with disabilities
And individuals with lived experience of disability in governance discussions around artificial intelligence to ensure inclusive design.
C. Support capacity building
For persons with disabilities to engage in artificial intelligence policy and technical development.
6. Monitoring and Measurement (paras 82–84)
Digital policy monitoring often omits disability-disaggregated data. The WSIS+20 review must:
A. Incorporate indicators tracking accessibility progress
Such as the percentage of websites and apps meeting international accessibility standards and the proportion of persons with disabilities with meaningful internet access—into WSIS+20 monitoring frameworks, designed in consultation with people with lived experience of disability.
7. Recommendations for the Zero Draft
A. Establish a cross-cutting principle
That accessibility is integral to all WSIS+20 objectives.
B. Require disability-disaggregated data collection
In connectivity, skills, and digital literacy indicators.
C. Strengthen international cooperation frameworks
To support accessible ICT development, especially in the Global South.
D. Allocate financial resources
To specifically bridge the digital accessibility gap.
E. Ensure proposals on artificial intelligence and data governance
Explicitly address inclusive design for persons with disabilities.
F. Include organizations of persons with disabilities
And people with lived experience of disability in all multistakeholder consultations, from capacity building to artificial intelligence governance.
G. Set measurable diversity targets
For persons with disabilities in Internet governance bodies and create mentorship pathways to build sustainable leadership rooted in lived experience.
8. Conclusion
The WSIS+20 review presents a historic opportunity to move beyond tokenism and enshrine digital accessibility at the heart of a truly inclusive Information Society. Without explicit commitments and concrete actions for persons with disabilities, and without the active leadership of people with lived experience of disability, the vision of universal, meaningful, and affordable access cannot be realized.
As Coordinator of the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability, I urge co-facilitators and all stakeholders to ensure that accessibility and the inclusion of people with lived experience of disability are not afterthoughts, but core priorities reflected throughout the WSIS+20 outcome documents and in the future mandate of the IGF. Only by doing so can we build a multistakeholder, inclusive governance model that serves the needs of all people and sets a precedent for equitable global digital policymaking.
About the Author
Dr. Muhammad Shabbir is a Pakistani researcher, accessibility advocate, and policy expert focusing on digital inclusion and international relations. He is the Coordinator of the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD) and a member of the IAAP Global Leadership Council. A former trustee of the Internet Society, he led its only board resolution on making the organization accessible for persons with disabilities. He has also engaged with ICANN, APRIGF, APSIG, MEAC-SIG, and PKSIG. Blind since childhood, he brings lived experience to global accessibility efforts.