There is an analog to what you're talking about for the internet, it's iana/icann, and that evolved from user-groups, committees, early governance structures that existed to establish standards and resolve disputes (like two organizations trying to claim the same IP space or dns names). The EFF is a different thing, and more an advocacy group than a governance body.

If the fediverse becomes massively successful, I have no doubt that along the way it will develop formal governing bodies with representation from major instances voting things around abuse management. Right now though there's just:

• The core devs team, a defined group that determines what features get added to the software.
• An informal loosely (dis)organized group of admins for the biggest instances, who talk to each other in an ad-hoc way to set norms.

If there was a proper governing body, it would be very useful to manage the Beehaw defederation situation. Not that they could force Beehaw or another instance to do anything specific, but they could set standards around registration verification (or lack thereof), cross instance moderation, vote to prioritize or fund development of specific moderation tools, and define coordinated sanctions for major instances that fail to meet the agreed upon standards.

I don't think we're ready for a formal group yet, especially because the personalities involved have such varied ideologies and in many cases deride the value of formal structures. Over time though, if the infighting doesn't kill the lemmyverse... typically reasonable compromisers ascend in influence through individual negotiations until the ecosystem is in a place where there's a critical mass behind setting up some minimal governance processes to resolve disputes rather than splitting the network everytime someone gets crabby.