[CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
Sun Aug 21 15:24:14 UTC 2016
Hi John
I certainly am not going to take paraminder’s “side” in the discussion of general principles and the idea of a global public governance model. But I think if you want lists of things that are wrong with the DIDP process here are two that could and should be changed immediately:
1. ICANN’s DIDP allows it to reject requests that it deems “not reasonable” or “excessive” or “vexatious.” That catch all gives ICANN plenary authority to more or less reject any request that it wants. That ground for rejecting a DIDP request should be eliminated completely.
2. Likewise, ICANN has recently (on the CCWG-A list) said that it cannot respond to requests for transparency as to how it has spent money relating to lobbying for the transition because of confidentiality agreements that it has voluntarily entered into with its service providers. As a matter of policy ICANN should never enter into agreements that allow it to refuse to disclose how it spends money on matters within the public cognizance.
That’s just two off the top of my head. But more generally, the consensus seems to be that the DIDP process is not functioning well. I forget who did the study but I recall clearly that at the Istanbul meeting of the CCWG-A someone presented data that more than 90% of DIDP requests are refused – which seems to me inconsistent with the commitment to make “information available to the public unless there is a compelling reason for confidentiality.”
So … there’s a start. I’m sure others can chime in.
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
<mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660
M: +1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
<http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: <http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/> http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of John Curran
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 8:32 AM
To: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
Cc: avri doria <avri at apc.org>; Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update
On Aug 21, 2016, at 8:25 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net> > wrote:
On Tuesday 16 August 2016 11:00 PM, John Curran wrote:
On Aug 16, 2016, at 1:22 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net> > wrote:
As I said, most democratic governments of the world have laws for access to public information. Take India's Right to Information Act for instance. Wikipedia information on it is here <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Information_Act,_2005> , and here is the actual text <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Information_Act,_2005> . The US also has very good laws in this regard, to which you can get easy access. Over 95 countries have some kind of freedom of information laws ( see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_laws_by_country ) and I think most of them have better transparency laws than what ICANN adheres to…
Please be specific. ICANN already has a "Documentary Information Disclosure Policy”,
and to the extent you believe it needs to be changed, it would be good to hear how.
John, I have been as specific as I can.
Again, please cite the specific changes to ICANN’s practices that you believe this
group should consider in its work.
I am not clear what is the 'community's' plan regarding this. Does this group share the expectation that at the end of the transition process, ICANN will adopt information disclosure policies of the same level as that of mature democracies today (I give the public information regimes of India and US as specific examples)? If not, why so?
John, it is your turn to be specific :)
If you believe that changes ICANN’s information disclosure practices are necessary,
please specify the changes that you wish to see. I do not have direct experience in
making use of ICANN’s information disclosure practices, nor am I recommending that
any changes be made, but you apparently are seeking that some changes be made
without actually detailing what these changes should be.
Thanks,
/John
Disclaimer: my views alone.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160821/d151aebc/attachment.html>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list