The Centre for Internet and Society
http://editors.cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 11 to 25.
DIDP Request #17 - How ICANN Chooses their Contractual Compliance Auditors
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-17-how-icann-chooses-their-contractual-compliance-auditors
<b>At a congressional hearing on internet governance and progress, then President of ICANN Fadi Chehadi indicated that the number of people working on compliance audits grew substantially—from 6 to 24 (we misquoted it as 25)— in the span of a few years.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span id="docs-internal-guid-88ef1d6f-3472-3cd6-bf11-e5bb7d2ea6a9">It is clear to us at CIS that the people in charge of these compliance audits perform an important function at ICANN. To that effect, we requested information on the 24 individuals mentioned by Mr Chehadi as well as the third party auditors who perform this powerful watchdog function. More specifically, we requested documents calling for appointments of the auditors and copies of their contracts with ICANN.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span id="docs-internal-guid-88ef1d6f-3472-5ef2-432a-dbb3e446057d">The request filed by Padmini Baruah can be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-request-20150901-5-01sep15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><span><span>What ICANN said</span></span></h3>
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-88ef1d6f-3472-81e4-8a58-7815de9e725d" style="text-align: justify; "><span>In their response to the first part of our question, ICANN linked us to a webpage containing the names and titles of all employees working on contractual compliance. This page contains 26 names including the Contractual Compliance Risk and Audit Manager: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/about-2014-10-10-en"><span>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/about-2014-10-10-en</span></a></p>
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-88ef1d6f-3472-cda1-dd73-6b12b9aa1fc5" style="text-align: justify; "><span>ICANN also described the process of selecting KPMG as their third party auditor in detail. A pre-selection process shortlists 5 companies that fit the following criteria: knowledge of ICANN, global presence, size, expertise and reputation. Then, ICANN issues a targeted Request For Proposal (RFP) to these companies asking them for their audit proposals. After a question and answer session, a proposal analysis and rating the scorecards, a “cross-functional steering committee” decided to go with KPMG. While the process has been discussed transparently, our questions remain unanswered.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-88ef1d6f-3473-0cee-aa58-9889a6de22eb" style="text-align: justify; "><span>The RFP would qualify as the document requested by us in the second part of the question (i.e.) a “document that calls for appointments to the post of the contractual compliance auditor.” Unfortunately, ICANN has not published the RFP citing the DIDP Conditions for Non-disclosure. However, the timeline for the RFP and other details have been posted </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/rfps-en"><span>here</span></a><span> after our DIDP request. In addition, the contract between KPMG and ICANN has also not been published. </span></p>
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-88ef1d6f-3473-2c8e-1679-7191963f7ad9" style="text-align: justify; "><span>ICANN's response to our DIDP request may be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-response-20150901-5-cis-auditor-appt-01oct15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>. </span></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-17-how-icann-chooses-their-contractual-compliance-auditors'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-17-how-icann-chooses-their-contractual-compliance-auditors</a>
</p>
No publisherasvathaICANNDIDPInternet Governance2016-07-29T02:20:59ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #16 - ICANN has no Documentation on Registrars’ “Abuse Contacts”
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-16-icann-has-no-documentation-on-registrars2019-201cabuse-contacts201d
<b>Registrars on contract with ICANN are required to maintain an “abuse contact” - a 24/7 dedicated phone line and e-mail address to receive reports of abuse regarding the registered names sponsored by the registrar.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We wrote to ICANN requesting information on these abuse complaints received by registrars over the last year. We specifically wanted reports of illegal activity on the internet submitted to these abuse contacts as well as details on actions taken by registrars in response to these complaints.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span id="docs-internal-guid-9b05b54d-3465-1c5e-3830-7af0d8e37b19">The request filed by Padmini Baruah can be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-request-20150901-4-01sep15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><span>What ICANN said</span></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Our request to ICANN very specifically dealt with reported illegal activities. However, in their response, ICANN first broadened it to abuse complaints and then failed to give a narrowed down list of even those complaints.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>In their response, ICANN indicated that they do not store records of complaints made to the abuse contact. This is stored by the registrars and is available to ICANN only upon request. However, since ICANN is only obliged to publish documents it already has in its possession, we did not receive an answer to our first question. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span id="docs-internal-guid-9b05b54d-3467-44df-1aed-bbe876d6dc71">As for the second item, ICANN gave a familiarly vague answer, linking us to the</span><a href="https://www.icann.org/compliance/notices"><span> Contractual Compliance Complaints</span></a><span> page with a list of all the breach notices that have been issued by ICANN to registrars. A breach notice is relevant to our request only if it is in response to an abuse complaint, and the abuse complaint specifically deals with illegal activity. Even discounting that, this is not a comprehensive list when you take into account that a breach notice is published only “if a </span><span>formal contractual compliance enforcement process has been initiated </span><span>relating to an abuse complaint and resulted in a breach.”<a href="#ftn1">[1] </a>What about the rest of the complaints received by the registrar?</span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span>In addition, ICANN refused to publish any communication or documentation of ICANN requesting reports of illegal activity under the DIDP non-disclosure conditions. <br /></span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span><span id="docs-internal-guid-9b05b54d-3469-bdb4-1603-805eb7dc6a97">ICANN's response to our DIDP request may be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-response-20150901-4-cis-abuse-complaints-01oct15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></span></span></p>
<hr />
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-9b05b54d-346a-e343-097c-9bedf6f32f17"><a name="ftn1">[1] </a><span>See ICANN response here (Pg 4): https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-response-20150901-4-cis-abuse-complaints-01oct15-en.pdf</span></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-16-icann-has-no-documentation-on-registrars2019-201cabuse-contacts201d'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-16-icann-has-no-documentation-on-registrars2019-201cabuse-contacts201d</a>
</p>
No publisherasvathaICANNDIDPInternet Governance2016-07-29T02:11:52ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #15: What is going on between Verisign and ICANN?
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-15-what-is-going-on-between-verisign-and-icann
<b>During a hearing of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on “Internet Governance Progress After ICANN 53,” President and CEO of ICANN - Mr Fadi Chehade indicated that ICANN follows up with registries and registrars on receipt of any complaint against them about violations of their contract with ICANN.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">At CIS, we believe that any exchange of dialogue or any outcome from ICANN acting on these complaints needs to be in the public domain. Thus, our 15th DIDP request to ICANN were for documents pertinent to Verisign’s contractual compliance and actions taken by ICANN stemming from any discrepancies of Verisign’s compliance with its ICANN contract.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span id="docs-internal-guid-f679a3d5-345d-67c5-6d95-690f07d56d1f">The DIDP request filed by Padmini Baruah can be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-request-20150901-3-01sep15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><span>What ICANN said</span></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>After sorting through a response designed to obfuscate information, it was clear that ICANN was not going to provide any of the details we requested. As mentioned in their previous responses, individual audit reports and the names of the registries associated with discrepancies are confidential under the DIDP Defined Conditions of Nondisclosure. Nevertheless, some details from the response are worth mentioning.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>According to the response, “As identified in Appendix B of the 2012 Contractual Compliance Year One Audit Program Report, the following TLDs were selected for auditing: DotAsia Organisation Limited (.ASIA), Telnic Limited (.TEL), Public Interest Registry (.ORG), Verisign (.NET), Afilias (.INFO), and Employ Media LLC (.JOBS).” The response goes on to state that out of these 6 registries that were selected, only 5 chose to participate in the audit, the identies of which are once again confidential. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>However, on further examination, it can be seen that Verisign (.NET) was chosen to participate in the audit the year after as well. Therefore, it’s clear that 2013 was the year Verisign was audited. Unfortunately, that was pretty much all that was relevant to our request in ICANN’s response.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Once again, ICANN was able to use the DIDP Defined Conditions of Nondisclosure, especially the following conditions to allow itself the ability not to answer the public: <br /></span></p>
<ul style="text-align: justify; ">
<li><span>Information exchanged, prepared for, or derived from the deliberative and decision-making process between ICANN, its constituents, and/or other entities with which ICANN cooperates that, if disclosed, would or would be likely to compromise the integrity of the deliberative and decision-making process between and among ICANN, its constituents, and/or other entities with which ICANN cooperates by inhibiting the candid exchange of ideas and communications.</span><span> </span></li>
<li><span>Information provided to ICANN by a party that, if disclosed, would or would be likely to materially prejudice the commercial interests, financial interests, and/or competitive position of such party or was provided to ICANN pursuant to a nondisclosure agreement or nondisclosure provision within an agreement.</span><span> </span></li>
<li><span>Confidential business information and/or internal policies and procedures.<a href="#ftn1">[1]</a></span><span> <br /></span></li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span id="docs-internal-guid-f679a3d5-345f-fcdf-ba09-26b6f74477d8">ICANN’s response to our request can be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-response-20150901-3-cis-contractual-violations-verisign-01oct15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<hr style="text-align: justify; " />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn1">[1] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-f679a3d5-3461-1364-7277-525329280407">See DIDP https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/didp-2012-02-25-en</span></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-15-what-is-going-on-between-verisign-and-icann'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-15-what-is-going-on-between-verisign-and-icann</a>
</p>
No publisherasvathaICANNDIDPInternet Governance2016-07-29T02:01:06ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #14: Keeping track of ICANN’s contracted parties: Registrars
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-14-keeping-track-of-icann2019s-contracted-parties-registrars
<b>In September 2016, we filed two separate DIDP requests regarding ICANN’s Contractual Compliance Goals.</b>
<p><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-322e-256d-7606-417c64dfd392">The first one which we have written about here,</span><a href="#ftn1">[1] </a>was regarding ICANN contracts with registries while the second one about registrars is briefed below. In our second request, we specifically asked for the following information:</p>
<ol>
<li>Copies of the registrar contractual compliance audit reports for all the audits carried out as well as external audit reports from the last year (2014-2015).</li>
<li>A generic template of the notice served by ICANN before conducting such an audit.</li>
<li>A list of the registrars to whom such notices were served in the last year.</li>
<li>An account of the expenditure incurred by ICANN in carrying out the audit process.</li>
<li>A list of the registrars that did not respond to the notice within a reasonable period of time.</li>
<li>Reports of the site visits conducted by ICANN to ascertain compliance.</li>
<li>Documents which identify the registrars who had committed material discrepancies in the terms of the contract.</li>
<li>Documents pertaining to the actions taken in the event that there was found to be some form of contractual non-compliance.</li>
<li>A copy of the registrar self-assessment form which is to be submitted to ICANN. </li>
</ol>
<p>The DIDP request filed by Padmini Baruah can be viewed here.</p>
<h3>What ICANN said</h3>
<p><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-3234-6693-c084-c898ecb92ff6">Information pertinent to item 1 and 3 can be found in the 2014 Contractual Compliance Annual Report here:https://</span><a href="http://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/annual-2014-13feb15-en.pdf"><span>www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/annual-2014-13feb15-en.pdf</span></a><span>. While this report contains detailed information regarding the audit, individual audit reports are subject to the DIDP Defined Conditions for Nondisclosure.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-3234-d617-f932-ee71027bdaf6">ICANN provided a link to all the communication templates used during the audit process, including the notice served by ICANN prior to conducting audits. (Item 2) It can be found here:</span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/audit-communication-template-04dec15-en.pdf"><span> </span><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/audit-communication-template-04dec15-en.pdf</span></a><span>. As mentioned in an earlier blog post, ICANN set aside USD 0.6 million for the Three Year Audit plan.<a href="#ftn2">[2] </a>(item 4)</span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span>According to the Audit FAQ on ICANN website,<a href="#ftn3">[3]</a> <span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-323a-156a-af6f-d315baa30ccd">“If a contracted party reaches the enforcement phase per process, ICANN will issue a notice of breach in which the outstanding issues are noted. The response links us to the ICANN webpage where these breach notices are listed:</span><a href="https://www.icann.org/compliance/notices#notices-2014"><span> </span><span>https://www.icann.org/compliance/notices#notices-2014</span></a><span>. (Item 5) According to the link, 61 registrars received breach notices in 2014; a full explanation has been provided for each notice. (Item 7 and 8) Since no site visits were conducted, ICANN does not possess any document regarding this.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span><span><span>According to the ICANN website, “The 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) requires ICANN-accredited registrars to complete an annual self-assessment and provide ICANN with a compliance certification by 20 January.”<a href="#ftn4">[4] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-3244-56d6-a94a-37347d37616b">The form for the same can be found here: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/approved-with-specs-2013-09-17-en#compliance"><span>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/approved-with-specs-2013-09-17-en#compliance</span></a></span></span></span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span><span><span><span><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-3244-91f8-830f-b40c5a82d02a">ICANN’s response to our request can be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-response-20150901-1-response-20150901-2-cis-ry-rr-audits-01oct15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<hr />
<p><a name="ftn1">[1] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-3258-80b4-c7aa-aea9801aceac">To be linked to the first post</span></p>
<p><a name="ftn2">[2] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-3258-28cd-a693-d1605b22ce9e">See FY15 budget (pg72): </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/adopted-opplan-budget-fy15-01dec14-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/adopted-opplan-budget-fy15-01dec14-en.pdf</span></a></p>
<p><a name="ftn3">[3] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf51bf89-3257-ded2-6793-607c741261a7">See Audit FAQ: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/faqs-2012-10-31-en</span></p>
<p><a name="ftn4">[4] </a>See CEO certification: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ceo-certification-2014-01-29-en</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-14-keeping-track-of-icann2019s-contracted-parties-registrars'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-14-keeping-track-of-icann2019s-contracted-parties-registrars</a>
</p>
No publisherasvathaICANNDIDPInternet Governance2016-07-28T16:34:27ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #13: Keeping track of ICANN’s contracted parties: Registries
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-13-keeping-track-of-icann2019s-contracted-parties-registries
<b>On multiple occasions, Fadi Chehade, then President and CEO of ICANN has emphasized the importance of conducting audits (internal and external) to ensure compliance of ICANN’s contracted parties. At a US congressional hearing, he spoke about the contract monitoring function of ICANN. </b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In September 2015, we filed two separate DIDP requests regarding ICANN’s Contractual Compliance Goals. The first one, briefed below, is regarding the contracts with registries and the second one is regarding ICANN contracts with registrars. This post contains some additional background information on the Contractual Compliance Goals at ICANN. In our first request, we specifically asked for the following information:</p>
<ol style="text-align: justify; ">
<li>Copies of the registry contractual compliance audit reports for all the audits carried out as well as external audit reports from the last year (2014-2015).</li>
<li>A generic template of the notice served by ICANN before conducting such an audit. </li>
<li>A list of the registries to whom such notices were served in the last year. </li>
<li>An account of the expenditure incurred by ICANN in carrying out the audit process. </li>
<li>A list of the registries that did not respond to the notice within a reasonable period of time. </li>
<li>Reports of the site visits conducted by ICANN to ascertain compliance.</li>
<li>Documents which identifies the registry operators who had committed material discrepancies in the terms of the contract. </li>
<li>Documents pertaining to the actions taken in the event that there was found to be some form of contractual non-compliance. </li>
</ol>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span id="docs-internal-guid-36e025c6-3214-1f40-f34c-66e56df641b6">The DIDP request filed by Padmini Baruah can be viewed </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-request-20150901-1-01sep15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><span>What ICANN said</span></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>ICANN’s Contractual Compliance Goal is to ensure that all the parties that ICANN has entered into a contract with complies with the stipulations of the contract. This is done in several ways, including Contractual Compliance complaints and Audits.<a href="#ftn1">[1]</a></span></p>
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-36e025c6-3223-35f4-9e89-5d38d93e81e3" style="text-align: justify; "><span>In 2012, ICANN initiated the Three Year Audit plan where one-third of registries were selected each year for an audit. In 2014, the third set of registries were audited. In response to Item 1, information about the audit for 2014 can be found here: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/contractual-compliance-ra-audit-report-2014-03feb15-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/contractual-compliance-ra-audit-report-2014-03feb15-en.pdf</span></a><span>. At this link, we can also find the list of registries that went through the audit process in 2014 (item 3). Monthly updates on overall contractual compliance can be found here:</span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/update-2013-03-15-en"><span> </span><span>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/update-2013-03-15-en</span></a><span>. </span></p>
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-36e025c6-3223-80b1-a31b-01ccfb91f71d" style="text-align: justify; "><span>ICANN linked us to all the communication templates used during the audit process, including the notice served by ICANN prior to conducting audits. (Item 2) It can be found here: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/audit-communication-template-04dec15-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/audit-communication-template-04dec15-en.pdf </span></a></p>
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify; "><span><span id="docs-internal-guid-36e025c6-3223-c0d0-b744-b06fc20af7d3">In the operating plan and budget for FY15, ICANN sets aside USD 0.2 million for the New Registry Agreement Audit and USD 0.6 million for the Three Year Audit plan.<a href="#ftn2">[2]</a></span></span></p>
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify; "><span><span>Other documents to answer this question such as invoices from the external auditing firm are subject to non-disclosure under DIDP policies. Since all registries responded in a timely manner and no site visits were conducted, there are no documents to answer items 5 and 6. </span></span></p>
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify; "><span><span>The audit report linked above contains information on deficiencies identified during the audit. ICANN states that registries addressed these deficiencies during the remediation process. However, there is a caveat to this discussion. The names of the registries that are associated with these discrepancies remains confidential, subject to the DIDP Defined Conditions for Nondisclosure. (Item 7) ICANN goes on to state that it is not required to confirm if the registries have taken appropriate action and thus does not have any documents in response to item 8. While ICANN’s audit process seems thorough, does this last statement indicate a lack of enforcement mechanisms on ICANN’s part? <br /></span></span></p>
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-36e025c6-3225-cbec-186e-0694f7918168" style="text-align: justify; "><span>ICANN’s response to our request can be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/didp-response-20150901-1-response-20150901-2-cis-ry-rr-audits-01oct15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<hr style="text-align: justify; " />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn1">[1]. </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-36e025c6-3227-7c19-f04b-6258c3ad1fbc">See Contractual Compliance website: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/compliance-2012-02-25-en</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn2">[2]. </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-36e025c6-3228-1009-f91a-30ea4972689f">See FY15 budget (pg72): </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/adopted-opplan-budget-fy15-01dec14-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/adopted-opplan-budget-fy15-01dec14-en.pdf</span></a></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-13-keeping-track-of-icann2019s-contracted-parties-registries'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-13-keeping-track-of-icann2019s-contracted-parties-registries</a>
</p>
No publisherasvathaICANNDIDPInternet Governance2016-07-28T15:40:01ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #9 - Exactly how involved is ICANN in the NETmundial Initiative?
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-9-exactly-how-involved-is-icann-in-the-netmundial-initiative
<b>The importance and relevance of knowing ICANN’s involvement in the NETmundial Initiative cannot be overstated.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It was reported recently that ICANN contributed US$200,000 to the Initiative.<a href="#ftn1">[1] </a>Following this report, we requested the details of all expenses incurred by ICANN for NMI till date. This includes formal contributions to NMI as well as costs incurred towards travel and accommodation of ICANN board and staff to meetings relevant to the NMI discussion.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Apart from these financial details, we also requested information regarding the number of staff working on NMI from ICANN and the hours clocked by them for the same. We further specified that we would like this information to gauge ICANN’s involvement beyond its technical mandate. <span id="docs-internal-guid-fb3cc834-2cf9-6ca2-744a-a463d372cec8">The request filed by </span><span>Geetha Hariharan</span><span> can be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-request-13jan15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><span>What ICANN said</span></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>In its response, ICANN separated the questions in the request into two categories: a) Expenses incurred by ICANN towards the NETmundial Initiative and b) Other resources (personnel and hours) allocated to the Initiative by ICANN. The first category in the request includes: formal contribution to the NETmundial Initiative; travel costs of ICANN board and staff; and costs of maintenance of other sponsored parties. The second includes the number of staff involved in the NETmundial Initiative from ICANN and the number of hours spent working on it.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>To answer both, the response directs us to the Memorandum of Collaboration (MOC)<a href="#ftn2">[2]</a><span id="docs-internal-guid-fb3cc834-2cff-6122-a30e-e27cf1377dd2">signed by the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (</span><a href="http://cgi.br"><span>CGI.br</span></a><span>), ICANN and the World Economic Forum (WEF) to set up the NETmundial Initiative according to the outcome document from the initial NETmundial meeting in Sao Paulo, Brazil. </span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span>Some of the important takeaways from the MOC that are relevant to our request are the following:</span></span></p>
<ul style="text-align: justify; ">
<li><span><span>Each party to the MOC agrees to pay $201,667 towards operational expenses on signature of the agreement.</span></span><span><span> </span></span></li>
<li><span><span>Total anticipated cost of the NETmundial Initiative is $605,000 (also mentioned in the response).</span></span><span><span> </span></span></li>
<li><span><span>Each party will assign 1 staff member to the NETmundial Initiative secretariat during the inaugural period to smoothen the process. This staff member will commit at least 50% of their time towards Secretariat work.</span></span></li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span>This information is important but it does not provide a comprehensive answer to our query. It does not, for example, answer if ICANN contributed anything more than the $201,667 the MOC specifies. It also does not tell us if ICANN allotted any staff apart from the designated secretariat member to work on NETmundial Initiative.</span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span>Further, the response states that ICANN does not keep track of costs according to the number of hours or the topic but rather according to strategic objectives. Since ICANN is not required to create a document that does not already exist to answer a DIDP enquiry,<a href="#ftn3">[3] </a>we have no way of knowing the specific amount of time or money spent on the NETmundial Initiative by ICANN. The response instead directs us to the financial presentation at ICANN50 where the costs of attending the NETmundial Meeting at Sao Paulo is detailed. While this is interesting (ICANN spent $1.5 million)<a href="#ftn4">[4] </a></span></span>it is not a satisfactory answer to our question.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN justifies its lack of direct answers by expressing that not only is the request “overbroad", it is also “subject to the following DIDP Condition of Nondisclosure: Information requests: (i) which are not reasonable; (ii) which are excessive or overly burdensome; and (iii) complying with which is not feasible.”<a href="#ftn5">[5] </a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span id="docs-internal-guid-fb3cc834-2d0e-b79e-fcb8-784e3a998046">ICANN's response to our DIDP request may be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-response-12feb15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<hr style="text-align: justify; " />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn1">[1] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-fb3cc834-2d0d-0c56-8105-394e1c8d2cac">See McCarthy, </span><span>‘I’m Begging You To Join’ – ICANN’s NETmundial Initiative gets desperate</span><span>, THE REGISTER (12 December 2014), </span><span>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/12/im begging you to join netmundial initiative gets d esperate/</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn2">[2] </a>See MOC: https://www.netmundial.org/sites/default/files/MOC-%20CGI.br,%20ICANN%20&%20WEF.pdf</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn3">[3] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-fb3cc834-2d0b-01ff-7d33-5afd3d4e7aec">See Disclosure Policy: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/didp-2012-02-25-en</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn4">[4] </a>See ICANN50 Finance Presentation (Pg 4): https://london50.icann.org/en/schedule/thu-finance/presentation-finance-26jun14-en</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn5">[5] </a>See ICANN conditions for non-disclosure: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/didp-2012-02-25-en</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-9-exactly-how-involved-is-icann-in-the-netmundial-initiative'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-9-exactly-how-involved-is-icann-in-the-netmundial-initiative</a>
</p>
No publisherasvathaICANNDIDPInternet Governance2016-07-27T15:53:22ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #10 - ICANN does not know how much each RIR contributes to its Budget
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-10-icann-does-not-know-how-much-each-rir-contributes-to-its-budget
<b>In an effort to understand the relationship between the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and ICANN, we requested current and historical information on the contract fees paid by the five RIRs (AfriNIC, ARIN, APNIC, LACNIC and RIPE NCC) to ICANN annually.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We acknowledged that the independently audited financial reports on ICANN’s website list the total amount from all RIRs as a lump sum.<a href="#ftn1">[1] </a>However, we specifically sought a breakdown of these fees detailing contributions made by each RIR from 1999 to 2014. Not only will this information help understand the RIR-ICANN relationship, it will also be relevant to the IANA transition.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The request filed by Protyush Choudhury can be found <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-request-06feb15-en.pdf">here</a>.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">What ICANN said</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">According to ICANN’s response to our request, the five RIRs (AfriNIC, ARIN, APNIC, LACNIC and RIPE NCC) make a voluntary annual contribution to ICANN’s budget through the Number Resource Organization (NRO). <a href="#ftn2">[2] </a> Since Financial Year 2000, this contribution has been made to ICANN as an aggregate amount without the kind of breakdown requested by us with the exception of FY03, FY04 and FY05. The breakdown of the contribution for those years is as below:</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify; ">
<li>FY03: APNIC - $129,400; ARIN - $159,345; RIPE - $206,255</li>
<li>FY04: APNIC - $160,500; ARIN - $144,450; RIPE - $224,700; LACNIC - $5,350</li>
<li>FY05: APNIC - $220,976; ARIN - $218,507; RIPE - $358,086; LACNIC - $25,431</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The response links back to the independent financial reports mentioned by us in the request. <span id="docs-internal-guid-ca5a7bda-2a44-cdfd-627f-3534a44a9ae4">These reports can be found on the ICANN website </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/current-en"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>On closer examination of the audit reports of FY03, 04 and 05, it is clear that the information provided in their response is either incomplete or incorrect. According to KPMG’s audit report of FY03, the total contribution from Address Registries is US$535,000. The breakdown in the response adds up only to $494,600. The response does not account for the extra $40,400. If only APNIC, ARIN and RIPE contributed to ICANN in 2003, where did the other $40,400 come from? Moreover, why is it listed as an Address Registry Fee in the audit report if it was a voluntary contribution?</span><a href="#ftn3">[3]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The “Address Registry Fees” in the audit reports for FY04 and FY05 match the amounts in the response: $535,000 and $823,00 respectively. <span id="docs-internal-guid-ca5a7bda-2a48-4c9a-4b9e-1793f74078dd">ICANN's response to our DIDP request may be found </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-response-08mar15-en.pdf"><span>here</span></a><span>.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>For the reader’s reference, the audit reports for FY00 - FY14 are linked below:</span></p>
<ul style="text-align: justify; ">
<li><span>FY00: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/financial-report-fye-2000-06-30-en"><span>https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/financial-report-fye-2000-06-30-en </span></a></li>
<li><span>FY01: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/financial-report-fye-2001-06-30-en"><span>https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/financial-report-fye-2001-06-30-en</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY02:</span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/financial-report-fye-2002-06-30-en"><span> </span><span>https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/financial-report-fye-2002-06-30-en</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY03: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun03-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun03-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY04: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun04-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun04-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY05: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun05-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun05-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY06: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun06-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun06-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY07: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun07-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun07-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY08: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun07-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun08-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY09: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun09-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun09-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY10:</span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun10-en.pdf"><span> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun10-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY11: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun11-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun11-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY12: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun12-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun12-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li><span>FY13:</span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun13-en.pdf"><span> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun13-en.pdf</span></a></li>
<li> <span>FY14: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun14-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun14-en.pdf</span></a></li>
</ul>
<hr style="text-align: justify; " />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn1">[1] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-ca5a7bda-2a4b-7429-43b1-6785f6f611ea">See audited financial reports: </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/current-en"><span>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/current-en</span></a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn2">[2] </a><span id="docs-internal-guid-ca5a7bda-2a4b-2ee6-07b6-012828ea134f">See letter from NRO to ICANN:</span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/akplogan-to-twomey-23mar09-en.pdf"><span> </span><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/akplogan-to-twomey-23mar09-en.pdf</span></a></p>
<p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-ca5a7bda-2a4a-bcc8-755d-d325f935f7e4" style="text-align: justify; "><a name="ftn3">[3]. </a><span>See report for FY03 (pg 4): </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun03-en.pdf"><span>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun03-en.pdf</span></a><span> </span></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-10-icann-does-not-know-how-much-each-rir-contributes-to-its-budget'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-10-icann-does-not-know-how-much-each-rir-contributes-to-its-budget</a>
</p>
No publisherasvathaICANNDIDPInternet Governance2016-07-27T14:57:00ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #8: ICANN Organogram
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-8-organogram
<b>CIS sent ICANN a request under its Documentary Information Disclosure Policy, seeking details of its oragnisational structure and headcount of all staff. CIS' request and ICANN's response are detailed below. </b>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">CIS Request</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>13 January 2015</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>To:</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Steve Crocker, Chairman of the Board</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Fadi Chehade, President and CEO</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Samiran Gupta, ICANN India</p>
<p style="text-align: center; "><strong>Sub: ICANN organogram</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><strong> </strong><span>In order to understand ICANN’s organizational structure, decision-making and day-to-day functioning, may we request an organogram of ICANN. We request that the organogram include ICANN’s reporting hierarchy, mentioning positions held in all departments. Wherever possible (such as middle and senior management), we request names of the ICANN staff holding the positions as well. Along with this, could you also provide a count per department of the number of ICANN staff employed in all departments as of this date?</span><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We await your favorable response and the requested information within the prescribed time limit. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any clarifications.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Thank you very much.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Warm regards,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Geetha Hariharan</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Centre for Internet & Society</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">W: <a href="http://cis-india.org">http://cis-india.org</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN Response</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN does not provide all the information we requested, but it responded with the following:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">First, ICANN has responded that its current staff headcount is approx. 310. ICANN states that it already makes publicly available an <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/management-org-01feb15-en.pdf">organisational chart</a>. This is immensely useful, for it sets out the reporting hierarchies at senior and mid-managerial levels. However, it doesn't tell us the organisational structure categorised by all departments and staff in the said departments. The webpages of some of ICANN's departments list out some of its staff; for instance, <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/about-2014-10-10-en">Contractual Compliance</a>, <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gse-2012-02-25-en">Global Stakeholder Engagement</a> and <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/policy">Policy Development</a> (scroll down).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">What you will notice is that ICANN provides us a list of staff, but we cannot be sure whether the team includes more persons than those mentioned. Second, a quick glance at the Policy Development staff makes clear that ICANN selects from outside this pool to coordinate the policy development. For instance, the IANA Stewardship Transition (the CWG-IANA) is supported by <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/profiles/grace-abuhamad">Ms. Grace Abuhamad</a>, who is not a member of the <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/policy">policy support staff</a>, but coordinates the IANA mailing list and F2F meetings anyway. What this means is that we're no longer certain who within ICANN is involved in policy development and support, whom they report to, and where the Chinese walls lie. This is why an organogram is necessary: the policy-making and implementation functions in ICANN may be closely linked because of staff interaction, and effective Chinese walls would benefit from public scrutiny.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Now, ICANN says that one may explore staff profiles on the <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/community/explore?profile_search%5Bbadge_filters%5D%5B%5D=staff_badge&profile_search%5Bbadge_filters%5D%5B%5D=&profile_search%5Bcountry_filters%5D%5B%5D=&profile_search%5Bicann_experience_filter%5D=&profile_search%5Big_experience_filter%5D=&profile_search%5Binterest_filters%5D%5B%5D=&profile_search%5Blanguage_filters%5D%5B%5D=&profile_search%5Bmembership_filters%5D%5B%5D=&profile_search%5Bprofile_filter%5D=&profile_search%5Bsearch_text%5D=&utf8=%E2%9C%93">Staff page</a>. While short biographies/profiles are available for most staff on the Staff page, it's unclear what departments they work in, how many staff members work each in department, whom they report to, and what the broad range of their responsibilities include.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Privacy concerns do not preclude the disclosure of such information for two reasons. First, staff profiles imply a consent to making staff information public (at least their place in the organisational structure, if not their salaries, addresses, phone extension numbers, etc.). Second, such information is necessary and helpful to scrutinise the effectiveness of ICANN's functioning. Like the example of the policy-making process mentioned above, greater transparency in internal functioning will itself serve as a check against hazards like partisanism, public comment aggregation, drafting of charters for policy-making and determining scope, etc. While the functioning itself may or need not change, scrutiny can ensure responsibility from ICANN and its staff.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response to our DIDP request may be </span><a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-organogram-response-11feb15-en.pdf" style="text-align: justify; "><strong>found here</strong></a><span style="text-align: justify; ">. A short summary of our request and ICANN's response may be found </span><a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/table-of-cis-didp-requests/at_download/file" style="text-align: justify; "><strong>in this table (Request S. no. 8)</strong></a><span style="text-align: justify; ">.</span></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-8-organogram'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-8-organogram</a>
</p>
No publishergeethaICANNDIDPTransparencyAccountability2015-03-17T11:39:16ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #7: Globalisation Advisory Groups
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-7-globalisation-advisory-groups
<b>CIS sent ICANN a request under its Documentary Information Disclosure Policy, seeking information regarding the creation and dissolution of the President's Globalisation Advisory Groups. The GAGs were created to advise the ICANN Board on its globalisation efforts, and to address questions on Affirmation of Commitments (AOC), policy structures, legal structure, root server system, the IANA multistakeholder accountability, and Internet governance. CIS' request and ICANN's response are detailed below.</b>
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<h2>CIS Request</h2>
<p><span>12 January 2015</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<p><span>To:<br /> Mr. Fadi Chehade, CEO and President</span></p>
<p><span> Mr. Steve Crocker, Chairman of the Board</span></p>
<p><span> Ms. Theresa Swineheart, Senior Advisor to the President on Strategy </span></p>
<p><span>Mr. Samiran Gupta, ICANN India </span></p>
<p style="text-align: center; "><span><strong>Sub: Creation and dissolution of the President’s Globalisation Advisory Groups </strong></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>On 17 February 2014, at a Special Meeting of the ICANN Board, the Board passed a resolution creating the President’s Globalisation Advisory Groups.</span><span>1 </span><span>Six Globalisation Advisory Groups were created, including on IANA globalization, legal structures, Internet governance, the Affirmation of Commitments, policy structures and the root server system.</span><span>2 </span><span>According to the minutes of the meeting, the Advisory Groups were to meet with the community at ICANN49 (Singapore, March 2014), make recommendations to the Board, and the Board would present their reports at ICANN50 (London, June 2014).</span><span>3 </span><span>Mr. Chehade was vested with the authority to change the Advisory Groups and their composition without the need for a further resolution, but the manner of dissolution was not laid out. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>ICANN lists the Advisory Groups on its “Past Groups” page, with no further information.</span><span>4 </span><span>Presumably, the Groups remained in existence for at most one month. No explanation is provided for the reasons regarding the dissolution of all the Advisory Groups. There are no reports or transcripts of meetings with the community at ICANN49 or recommendations to Mr. Chehade or the Board.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<p><span>The Globalisation Advisory Groups covered issues crucial for ICANN and the global Internet governance community, including its seat (“Legal Structures”), the Affirmation of Commitments (considered critical for ICANN’s accountability), the IANA stewardship transition, and ICANN’s (increasing) involvement in Internet governance. Given this, we request the following information: </span></p>
<div class="column">
<ul>
<li><span>Of the six Globalisation Advisory Groups created, is any Group active as of today (12 January 2015)? </span></li>
<li><span>When and how many times did any of the Groups meet?</span></li>
<li><span>On what date were the Groups dissolved? Were all Groups dissolved on the </span><span>same date?</span></li>
<li><span>By what mechanism did the dissolution take place (oral statement, email)? If the dissolution occurred by way of email or statement, please provide a copy of the same.</span></li>
<li><span>Did any of the six Globalisation Advisory Groups present any report, advice, or recommendations to Mr. Chehade or any member(s) of the Board, prior to their dissolution? If yes, please provide the report/recommendations (if available) and/or information regarding the same.</span></li>
<li><span>Why were the Advisory Groups dissolved? Has any reason been recorded, and if not, please provide an explanation.</span></li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="column"><span>We await your favorable response and the requested information within the prescribed time limit. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any clarifications.</span></div>
<div class="column"></div>
<div class="column"><span>Thank you very much.</span></div>
<p>Warm regards,<br /> Geetha Hariharan<br /> Centre for Internet & Society</p>
<ul>
</ul>
</div>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN Response</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response to this request is positive. ICANN states that the Board did indeed set up the six Globalisation Advisory Groups (GAGs) on 17 February 2014 to tackle issues surrounding ICANN's globalisation efforts. The Affirmation of Commitments (AOC), policy structures, legal structure, root server system, the IANA multistakeholder accountability, and Internet governance were issues taken up by the GAGs. However, after the NTIA made its announcement regarding the IANA transition in March 2014, the GAGs were disbanded so as to avoid duplication of work on issues that "<span>had a home in the global multistakeholder discussions". As a result, by a Board resolution dated 27 March 2014, the GAGs were dissolved. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>This is an example of a good response to an information request. Some documentation regarding the creation and dissolution of the GAGs existed, such as the Board resolutions. The response points us to these documents, and summarises the reasons for the GAGs' creation and dissolution. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is possible that this response is clear/comprehensive because the GAGs no longer exist, and in any event, did not perform any work worth writing about. Queries about ICANN's involvement in Internet governance (NETmundial, the NETmundial Initiative, etc.) garner responses that are, to say it informally, cage-y and surrounded by legalese.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response to our DIDP request may be <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-response-09feb15-en.pdf"><strong>found here</strong></a>. A short summary of our request and ICANN's response may be found <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/table-of-cis-didp-requests/at_download/file"><strong>in this table (Request S. no. 7)</strong></a>.</p>
<hr size="1" style="text-align: justify; " width="33%" />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>[1] </span><span><i>See</i> </span><span>Approved Board Resolutions | Special Meeting of the Board</span><span>, </span><span><a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-02-17-en">https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-02-17-en</a></span><span>.</span></p>
<p>[2] <i>See</i> President’s Globalisation Advisory Groups, <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/globalization-19feb14-en.pdf">https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/globalization-19feb14-en.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>[3] <i>See</i> Minutes | Special Meeting of the Board, <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/board- material/minutes-2014-02-17-en">https://www.icann.org/resources/board- material/minutes-2014-02-17-en</a>.</p>
<p>[4] <i>See</i> Past Committees, Task Forces, and Other Groups, <a class="external-link" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/past-2012-02-25-en">https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/past-2012-02-25-en</a>.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-7-globalisation-advisory-groups'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-7-globalisation-advisory-groups</a>
</p>
No publishergeethaICANNDIDPTransparencyAccountability2015-03-17T10:07:26ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #6: Revenues from gTLD auctions
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-6-revenues-from-gtld-auctions
<b>CIS sent ICANN a request under its Documentary Information Disclosure Policy, seeking information regarding revenues received from gTLD auctions. CIS' request and ICANN's response are detailed below.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">CIS Request</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>12 January 2015</span><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">To:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Fadi Chehade, CEO and President</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Steve Crocker, Chairman of the Board</p>
<p style="text-align: center; "><strong>Sub: Revenues from gTLD auctions</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is our understanding that an auction for a Generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) is used as a last-resort mechanism in order to resolve string contention, i.e., when there are groups of applications for same or confusingly similar new gTLDs. As of now, the ICANN website only furnishes information of the winning applicant and the winning price, as regards each new gTLD auction.<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> We have observed that information regarding the bids from all other applicants is not available. The revenue information provided to us<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> does not include revenues from new gTLDs.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In this regard, we request you to provide us with the following information:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(i) How many gTLDs have been sold <i>via</i> the auction process, since its inception?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(ii) What were the starting and winning bids in the ICANN auctions conducted?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(iii) What revenue has ICANN received from the gTLD auctions, since the first ICANN auction was conducted? Please also provide information about the winner (name, corporate information provided to/ available with ICANN).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(iv) How are proceeds from the gTLD auction process utilized?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>We believe that this information will give us a framework for understanding the gTLD auction process within ICANN. Furthermore, it will assist us in understanding the manner and purpose for which the proceeds from the auctioning process are utilized, in the broader structure of ICANN transparency and accountability.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We hope that our request will be processed within the stipulated time period of 30 days. Do let us know if you require any clarifications on our queries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Warm regards,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Lakshmi Venkataraman,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">IV Year, NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>for </i>Centre for Internet & Society</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">W: <a href="http://cis-india.org">http://cis-india.org</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN Response</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response to the above query is positive. ICANN states that all information surrounding the auctions is available on the New gTLDs microsite, and on the Auctions page: <span>http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/auctions. The current status of </span><span>auction proceeds and costs are available at </span><span>http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/auctions/proceeds,</span><span> and auction results are at </span><span>https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/auctionresults. The utilization of proceeds from the auctions is yet to be decided by the ICANN Board:</span><span> “[auction] proceeds will be reserved and earmarked until the Board determines a plan for the appropriate use of the funds through consultation with the community. Auction proceeds are net of any Auction costs. Auction costs may include initial set-up costs, auction management fees, and escrow fees.”</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response to our DIDP request may be <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-response-09feb15-en.pdf"><strong>found here</strong></a>.</span><span style="text-align: justify; "> A short summary of our request and ICANN's response may be found </span><a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/table-of-cis-didp-requests/at_download/file" style="text-align: justify; "><strong>in this table (Request S. no. 6)</strong></a><span style="text-align: justify; ">.</span></p>
<hr size="1" style="text-align: justify; " width="33%" />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> See <i>Auction Results</i>, <a href="https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/auctionresults">https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/auctionresults</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> See <i>ICANN reveals hitherto undisclosed details of domain names revenues</i>, <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-receives-information-on-icanns-revenues-from-domain-names-fy-2014">http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-receives-information-on-icanns-revenues-from-domain-names-fy-2014</a>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-6-revenues-from-gtld-auctions'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-6-revenues-from-gtld-auctions</a>
</p>
No publishergeethaICANNDIDPTransparencyAccountability2015-03-10T10:59:37ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #5: The Ombudsman and ICANN's Misleading Response to Our Request
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-5-the-ombudsman-and-icanns-misleading-response-to-our-request-1
<b>CIS sent ICANN a request under its Documentary Information Disclosure Policy, seeking details of the complaints received and resolved, parties involved and the nature of complaints under the Ombudsman process. CIS' request and ICANN's response are detailed below. ICANN's response is misleading in its insistence on confidentiality of all Ombudsman complaints and resolutions.</b>
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">CIS Request</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>26 December 2014</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<p><span>To:<br /> Mr. Steve Crocker, Chairman of the Board </span></p>
<p><span>Mr. Fadi Chehade, CEO and President </span></p>
<p><span>Mr. Chris LaHatte, Ombudsman, ICANN </span></p>
<p style="text-align: center; "><span><strong>Sub: Details regarding complaints submitted to the ICANN Ombudsman </strong></span></p>
<p><span>We are very pleased to note that ICANN’s transparency and accountability mechanisms include maintaining a free, fair and impartial ombudsman. It is our understanding that any person with a complaint against the ICANN Board, staff or organization, may do so to the designated ombudsman.[1]</span><span> </span><span>We also understand that there are cases that the ICANN ombudsman does not have the authority to address. </span></p>
<p><span>In order to properly assess and study the efficiency and effectiveness of the ombudsman system, we request you to provide us with the following information: </span></p>
<p><span>(i) A compilation of all the cases that have been decided by ICANN ombudsmen in the history of the organization. </span></p>
<p><span>(ii) The details of the parties that are involved in the cases that have been decided by the ombudsmen. </span></p>
<p><span>(iii)A description of the proceedings of the case, along with the party that won in each instance. </span></p>
<p><span>Further, we hope you could provide us with an answer as to why there have been no ombudsman reports since the year 2010, on the ICANN website.[2]</span><span> </span><span>Additionally, we would like to bring to your notice that the link that provides the ombudsman report for the year 2010 does not work.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<p><span>In order to properly assess the mechanism that ICANN uses for grievance redressal, it would be necessary to examine the details of all the cases that ICANN ombudsmen have presided over in the past. In this regard, kindly provide us with the above information.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<p><span>We do hope that you will be able to furnish this information to us within the stipulated time period of 30 days. Do not hesitate to contact us if you have any doubts regarding our queries. Thank you so much. </span></p>
<p><span>Yours sincerely,<br /> Lakshmi Venkataraman<br /> NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad, </span><span>for </span><span>Centre for Internet & Society<br /> W: http://cis-india.org</span></p>
<p> </p>
<h2>ICANN Response</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In its response, ICANN declines our request on grounds of confidentiality. It refers to the ICANN Bylaws on the office of the Ombudsman to argue that all matters brought before the Ombudsman "shall be treated as confidential" and the Ombudsman shall "<span>take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman". ICANN states that the Ombudsman publishes Annual Reports, in which he/she provides a "consolidated analysis of the year's complaints and resolutions", including "</span><span>a description of any trends or common elements of complaints received". </span><span>In sum, ICANN states that m</span><span>aking Ombudsman Requests public would violate ICANN Bylaws, and topple the independence and integrity of the Ombudsman.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">These are, perhaps, valid reasons to decline our DIDP request. But it is important to investigate ICANN's reasons. The <span>ICANN Board appoints the Ombudsman for 2 year terms, under </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en#V">Article V of ICANN’s Bylaws</a><span>. As we note </span><a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/where-does-icann2019s-money-come-from-we-asked-they-don2019t-know">in an earlier post</a><span>, the Ombudsman’s principal function is to receive and dispose of <span style="text-align: justify; ">complaints about unfair treatment by the ICANN Board, Staff or constituency.</span></span><span> He/she reports to the ICANN Board alone. He/she also </span><span>reports on the categories of complaints he receives, and statistics regarding decisions in his </span><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/reports-96-2012-02-25-en">Annual Reports</a><span>; no details are forthcoming for stated reasons of confidentiality and privacy. </span><span>It is clear, therefore, that the Ombudsman receives and disposes of complaints under a procedure that is inadequately transparent. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>ICANN argues, however, that for reasons of confidentiality and integrity of the Ombudsman office, ICANN is unable to disclose details regarding Ombudsman complaints, the complainants/respondents and a description of the proceedings (including the decision/resolution). Indeed, ICANN states its</span><span> "Bylaws and <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ombudsman-framework-26mar09-en.pdf">the Ombudsman Framework</a> obligates the Ombudsman to treat all matters brought before him as confidential and 'to take reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman'.” For this reason, ICANN considers that "D</span><span>isclosing details about the parties involved and the nature of the cases that have been decided by the Ombudsmen would not only compromise the confidentiality of the Ombudsman process but would also violate the ICANN Bylaws and the Ombudsman Framework." </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>While the privacy of parties both involved and "not involved in the complaint" can be preserved (by redacting names, email addresses and other personal identification), h</span><span>ow valid is ICANN's dogged insistence on confidentiality and non-disclosure? Let's look at Article V of ICANN's Bylaws and the Ombudsman Framework both.</span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Do ICANN Bylaws bind the Ombudsman to Confidentiality?</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Under Article V, Section 1(2) of ICANN's Bylaws, the Ombudsman is appointed by the ICANN Board for a 2 year term (renewable). As noted earlier, the Ombudsman's principal function is to<span> </span><span>“provide an independent internal evaluation of complaints by members of the ICANN community who believe that the ICANN staff, Board or an ICANN constituent body has treated them unfairly” or inappropriately (Art. V, Section 2). The Ombudsman is not a judge; his conflict resolution tools are "</span><span>negotiation, facilitation, and 'shuttle diplomacy'. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>According to Art. V, Section 3(3), the Ombudsman has access to "all necessary information and records from staff and constituent bodies" to evaluate complaints in an informed manner. While the Ombudsman can <i>access</i> these records, he may not "publish if otherwise confidential". When are these records confidential, then? Section 3(3) supplies the answer. The confidentiality obligations are as "imposed by the complainant or <span style="text-align: justify; ">any generally applicable confidentiality policies adopted by ICANN". For instance, the complainant can waive its confidentiality by publishing the text of its complaint <span style="text-align: justify; ">and the Ombudsman's response to the same </span>(such as the <a href="http://www.internetcommerce.org/ica-tells-icann-ombudsman-office-its-irt-report-tardy-nonresponsive-and-non-persuasive/">Internet Commerce Association's complaint</a> regarding the Implementation Review Team under the new gTLD program), or a complaint may be publicly <a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2012-November/010974.html">available on a listserv</a>. In any event, there is no blanket confidentiality obligation placed on the Ombudsman under ICANN's Bylaws.</span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span style="text-align: justify; "><span style="text-align: justify; ">Moreover, the Ombudsman also publishes Annual Reports,</span><span style="text-align: justify; "> in which he/she provides a "consolidated analysis of the year's complaints and resolutions", including "</span><span style="text-align: justify; ">a description of any trends or common elements of complaints received". That is, the Ombudsman's Annual Report showcases a graph comparing the increase in the number of complaints, categories of complaints (i.e., whether the complaints fall within or outside of the Ombudsman's jurisdiction), and a brief description of the Ombudsman's scope of resolution and response. The Annual Reports indicate that the mandate of the Ombudsman's office is extremely narrow. In 2014, for instance, 75 out of 467 complaints were <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/annual-report-2014-27jan15-en.pdf">within Mr. LaHatte's jurisdiction</a> (page 5), but he notes that his ability to intervene is limited to "failures in procedure". <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-recommendations-31dec13-en.pdf">As an input to the ATRT2 Report noted</a>, the Office of the Ombudsman “appears so restrained and contained” (page 53). As the ATRT2 noted, "</span></span></span><span>ICANN needs to reconsider the Ombudsman’s charter and the Office’s role as a symbol of good governance to be further incorporated in transparency processes"; the Office's transparency leaves much to be desired.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span style="text-align: justify; "><span style="text-align: justify; ">But I digress.</span></span></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span><span style="text-align: justify; ">The Ombudsman is authorised to make reports on any complaint and its resolution (or lack thereof) to the ICANN Board, and unless the Ombudsman says so <i>in his sole discretion</i>, his reports are to be posted on the website (Art. V, Section 4(4)). <span style="text-align: justify; ">The Ombudsman can also report on individual requests, such as </span><a href="https://omblog.icann.org/index.html%3Fp=1015.html" style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. LaHatte's response to a complaint regarding a DIDP denial</a><span style="text-align: justify; "> (cached). </span>Some reports are actually available on the Ombudsman page; the last published report dates back to 2012, though in 2013 and 2014, the Ombudsman dealt with more complaints within his jurisdiction than in 2012 or prior. </span></span><span>So ICANN's argument that disclosing the information we ask for in our DIDP Request would violate ICANN Bylaws and the confidentiality of the Ombudsman is misleading. </span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Does the Ombudsman Framework Prohibit Public Reporting?</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">So if ICANN Bylaws do not <i>ipso facto</i> bind the Ombudsman's complaint and conflict resolution process to confidentiality, does the Ombudsman Framework do so?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Ombudsman does indeed have confidentiality obligations under <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ombudsman-framework-26mar09-en.pdf" style="text-align: justify; ">the Ombudsman Framework</a> (page 4). All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential, and the identities of parties not involved in the complaint are required to be protected. The Ombudsman may reveal the identity of the complainant to the ICANN Board or Staff only to further the resolution of a complaint (which seems fairly obvious); this obligation is extended to ICANN Board and Staff as well.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As the Framework makes crystal clear, the <i>identity of complainants</i> are to be kept confidential. Nothing whatsoever binds the Ombudsman from revealing the stakeholder group or affiliation of the complainants - and these are possibly of more importance. What stakeholders most often receive unfair or inappropriate treatment from ICANN Board, Staff or constituent bodies? Does business suffer more, or do non-commercial users, or indeed, governments? It is good to know <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/annual-report-2014-27jan15-en.pdf">what countries the complaints come from (page 4-5)</a>, but given ICANN's insistence on its multi-stakeholder model as a gold standard, it is important to know what stakeholders suffer the most in the ICANN system.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In fact, in the first page, the Ombudsman Framework says this: "<span><strong>The Ombudsman may post complaints and resolutions to a dedicated portion of the ICANN website</strong> (http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/): (i) <strong>in order to promote an understanding of the issues in the ICANN community</strong>; (ii) to raise awareness of administrative fairness; and (iii) <strong>to allow the community to see the results of similar previous cases</strong>. These postings will be done in a <strong>generic manner</strong> to protect the confidentiality and privilege of communicating with the Office of Ombudsman." But the ICANN website does not, in fact, host records of any Ombudsman complaints or resolutions; it links you only to the Annual Reports and Publications. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>As I've written before, the Annual Reports provide no details regarding the nature of each complaint, their origins or resolution, and are useful if the only information we need is bare statistics of the <i>number of complaints received</i>. That is useful, but it's not enough. Given that the Ombudsman Framework <i>does</i> allow complaint/resolution reporting, it is baffling that ICANN's response to our DIDP request chooses to emphasise only the confidentiality obligations, while conveniently leaving out the parts enabling and encouring reporting. </span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Should ICANN Report the Ombudsman Complaints?</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Of course it should. The Ombudsman is aimed at filling an integral gap in the ICANN system - he/she listens to complaints about treatment by the ICANN Board, Staff or constituent bodies. As the discussions surrounding the appeal procedures in the CWG-Names show, and as the ATRT2 recommendations on Reconsideration and Independent Review show, conflict resolution mechanisms are crucial in any environment, not least a multi-stakeholder one. And in an organisation that leaves much desired by way of accountability and transparency, not reporting on complaints against the Board, staff or constituencies seems a tad irresponsible.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">If there are privacy concerns regarding the identities of complainants, their personal identifying information can be redacted. Actually, <a href="https://omb.icann.org/portal/complaint.php">in the complaint form</a>, adding a waiver-of-confidentiality tick-box would solve the problem, allowing the complainant to choose whether to keep his/her complaint unreportable. But the details of the respondents ought to be reported; as the entity responsible and accountable, ICANN should disclose whom complaints have been made against.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response to our DIDP request may be <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-ombudsman-response-27jan15-en.pdf"><b>found here</b></a>. A short summary of our request and ICANN's response may be found <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/table-of-cis-didp-requests/at_download/file"><strong>in this table (Request S. no. 5)</strong></a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<hr size="1" style="text-align: justify; " width="33%" />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>[1] </span><span><i>See</i> </span><span>What the Ombudsman can do for you</span><span>, </span><span>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/contact- 2012-02-25-en</span><span>.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>[2] <i>See</i> Annual Reports & Publications, https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/reports-96-2012- 02-25-en.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-5-the-ombudsman-and-icanns-misleading-response-to-our-request-1'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-5-the-ombudsman-and-icanns-misleading-response-to-our-request-1</a>
</p>
No publishergeethaICANNDIDPTransparencyAccountability2015-03-06T11:11:31ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #4: ICANN and the NETmundial Principles
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-4-icann-and-the-netmundial-principles
<b>CIS sent ICANN a request under its Documentary Information Disclosure Policy, seeking details of ICANN's implementation of the NETmundial Principles that it has endorsed widely and publicly. CIS' request and ICANN's response are detailed below.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">CIS Request</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>27 December 2014</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">To:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Fadi Chehade, CEO and President</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Steve Crocker, Chairman of the Board</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Cherine Chalaby, Chair, Finance Committee of the Board</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Xavier Calvez, Chief Financial Officer</p>
<p style="text-align: center; "><strong>Sub: Details of implementation by and within ICANN of the NETmundial Outcome Document (April ‘14)</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We express our appreciation at ICANN’s prompt acknowledgement of our previous DIDP request, and await the information. We would, in the meanwhile, request information regarding ICANN’s internal measures to implement the NETmundial Outcome Document.<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In a post titled <i>Turning Talk Into Action After NETmundial,</i><a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> Mr. Chehade emphasized the imperative to carry forward the NETmundial principles to fruition. In nearly every public statement, Mr. Chehade and other ICANN representatives have spoken in praise and support of NETmundial and its Outcome Document.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">But in the absence of binding value to them, self-regulation and organizational initiatives pave the way to adopt them. There must be concrete action to implement the Principles. In this regard, we request information about mechanisms or any other changes afoot within ICANN, implemented internally in recognition of the NETmundial Principles.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">At the IGF in Istanbul, when CIS’ Sunil Abraham raised this query,<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> Mr. Chehade responded that mechanisms ought to and will be undertaken jointly and in collaboration with other organisations. However, institutional improvements are intra-organisational as well, and require changes <i>within </i>ICANN. An example would be the suggestions to strengthen the IGF, increase its term, and provide financial support (some of which are being achieved, though ICANN’s financial contribution to IGFSA is incongruous in comparison to its financial involvement in the NETmundial Initiative).<span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">From ICANN, we have seen consistent championing of the controversial NETmundial Initiative,<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> and contribution to the IGF Support Association.<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> There are also mechanisms instituted for IANA Stewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN Accountability,<a href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> as responses to the NTIA’s announcement to not renew the IANA functions contract and related concerns of accountability.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In addition to the above, we would like to know what ICANN has done to implement the NETmundial Principles, internally and proactively.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We hope that our request will be processed within the stipulated time period of 30 days. Do let us know if you require any clarifications on our queries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Thank you very much.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Warm regards,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Geetha Hariharan</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Centre for Internet & Society</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">W: <a href="http://cis-india.org">http://cis-india.org</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN Response</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response to the above request disappointingly linked to the very same blogpost we note in our request, <i>Turning Talk Into Action After NETmundial</i>. Following this, ICANN points us to their involvement in the NETmundial Initiative. On the question of internal implementation, ICANN's response is defensive, to say the least. "ICANN is not the home for the implementation of the NETmundial Principles", they say. In any event, ICANN defends that it already implements the NETmundial Principles in its functioning, a response that comes as a surprise to us. "<span>Many of the NETmundial Principles are high-level statements that permeate through the </span><span>work of any entity – particularly a multistakeholder entity like ICANN – that is interested </span><span>in the upholding of the inclusive, multistakeholder process within the Internet governance </span><span>framework", notes ICANN's response. Needless to say, ICANN's response falls short of responding to our queries. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Finally, ICANN notes that our request is beyond the scope of the DIDP, as it does not relate to ICANN's operational activities. Notwithstanding that our query does in fact seek ICANN's operationalisation of the NETmundial Principles, we are now confused as to where to go to seek this information from ICANN. If the DIDP is not the effective transparency tool it is aimed to be, who in ICANN can provide answers to these questions?</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>ICANN's response may be <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-netmundial-response-27jan15-en.pdf"><strong>found here</strong></a>. A short summary of our request and ICANN's response may be found <a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/table-of-cis-didp-requests/at_download/file"><strong>in this table (Request S. no. 4)</strong></a>.</span></p>
<hr size="1" style="text-align: justify; " width="33%" />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> See <i>NETmundial Multi-stakeholder Statement</i>, <a href="http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETmundial-Multistakeholder-Document.pdf">http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETmundial-Multistakeholder-Document.pdf</a>. <i> </i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> See Chehade, <i>Turning Talk Into Action After NETmundial</i>, <a href="http://blog.icann.org/2014/05/turning-talk-into-action-after-netmundial/">http://blog.icann.org/2014/05/turning-talk-into-action-after-netmundial/</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> See <i>ICANN Open Forum</i>, 9<sup>th</sup> IGF 2014 (Istanbul, Turkey), <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cio31nsqK_A">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cio31nsqK_A</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> See McCarthy, <i>I’m Begging You To Join</i>, The Register (12 December 2014), <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/12/im_begging_you_to_join_netmundial_initiative_gets_desperate/">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/12/im_begging_you_to_join_netmundial_initiative_gets_desperate/</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> See <i>ICANN Donates $50k to Internet Governance Forum Support Association</i>, <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/press-material/release-2014-12-18-en">https://www.icann.org/resources/press-material/release-2014-12-18-en</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> See <i>NTIA IANA Functions’ Stewardship Transition & Enhancing ICANN Accountability Processes</i>, <a href="https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability">https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability</a>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-4-icann-and-the-netmundial-principles'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-4-icann-and-the-netmundial-principles</a>
</p>
No publishergeethaICANNDIDPTransparencyAccountability2015-03-05T08:28:44ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #3: Cyber-attacks on ICANN
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-3-cyber-attacks-on-icann
<b>CIS sent ICANN a request under its Documentary Information Disclosure Policy, seeking details of cyber-attacks on ICANN, and ICANN's internal and external responses to the same. CIS' request and ICANN's response are detailed below.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">CIS Request</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>24 December 2014</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">To:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Steve Crocker, Chairman of the Board</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Fadi Chehade, CEO and President</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Geoff Bickers, Team Lead, ICANN Computer Incident Response Team (CIRT) & Director of Security Operations</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. John Crain, Chief Security, Stability and Resiliency Officer</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Members of the ICANN-CIRT & ICANN Security Team</p>
<p style="text-align: center; "><strong>Sub: Details of cyber-attacks on ICANN</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We understand that ICANN recently suffered a spear-phishing attack that compromised contact details of several ICANN staff, including their email addresses; these credentials were used to gain access to ICANN’s Centralized Zone Data System (CZDS).<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> We are glad to note that ICANN’s critical functions and IANA-related systems were not affected.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The incident has, however, raised concerns of the security of ICANN’s systems. In order to understand when, in the past, ICANN has suffered similar security breaches, we request details of all cyber-attacks suffered or thought/suspected to have been suffered by ICANN (and for which, therefore, investigation was carried out within and outside ICANN), from 1999 till date. This includes, naturally, the recent spear-phishing attack.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We request information regarding, <i>inter alia</i>,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(1) the date and nature of all attacks, as well as which ICANN systems were compromised,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(2) actions taken internally by ICANN upon being notified of the attacks,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(3) what departments or members of staff are responsible for security and their role in the event of cyber-attacks,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(4) the role and responsibility of the ICANN-CIRT in responding to cyber-attacks (and when policies or manuals exist for the same; if so, please share them),</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(5) what entities external to ICANN are involved in the identification and investigation of cyber-attacks on ICANN (for instance, are the police in the jurisdiction notified and do they investigate? If so, we request copies of complaints or information reports),</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(6) whether and when culprits behind the ICANN cyber-attacks were identified, and</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(7) what actions were subsequently taken by ICANN (ex: liability of ICANN staff for security breaches should such a finding be made, lawsuits or complaints against perpetrators of attacks, etc.).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Finally, we also request information on the role of the ICANN Board and/or community in the event of such cyber-attacks on ICANN. Also, when was the ICANN-CIRT set up and how many incidents has it handled since its existence? Do there exist contingency procedures in the event of compromise of IANA systems (and if so, what)?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We hope that our request will be processed within the stipulated time period of 30 days. Do let us know if you require any clarifications on our queries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Thank you very much.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Warm regards,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Geetha Hariharan</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Centre for Internet & Society</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">W: <a href="http://cis-india.org">http://cis-india.org</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN Response</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN responded to our request by noting that it is vague and broad in both time and scope. In response, ICANN has provided information regarding certain cyber-incidents already in the public domain, while noting that the term "cyber-attack" is both wide and vague. While the information provided is undoubtedly useful, it is anecdotal at best, and does not provide a complete picture of ICANN's history of vulnerability to cyber-attacks or cyber-incidents, or the manner of its internal response to such incidents, or of the involvement of external law enforcement agencies or CIRTs in combating cyber-incidents on ICANN.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response may be <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-response-23jan15-en.pdf"><b>found here</b></a>. A short summary our request and ICANN's response may be found <a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/table-of-cis-didp-requests/at_download/file"><b>in this table (Request S. no. 3)</b></a>.</p>
<hr size="1" style="text-align: justify; " width="33%" />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> See<i> ICANN targeted in spear-phishing attack</i>, <a href="https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2014-12-16-en">https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2014-12-16-en</a>. <i> </i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> See <i>IANA Systems not compromised</i>, <a href="https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-12-19-en">https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-12-19-en</a>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-3-cyber-attacks-on-icann'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-3-cyber-attacks-on-icann</a>
</p>
No publishergeethaICANNDIDPTransparencyAccountability2015-03-05T08:16:26ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #2: Granular Revenue/Income Statements from ICANN
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-2
<b>CIS sent ICANN a request under its Documentary Information Disclosure Policy, seeking current and historical details of ICANN's income/revenue from its various sources. CIS' request and ICANN's response are detailed below.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">CIS Request</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span style="text-decoration: underline;">22 December 2014</span><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">To:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Cherine Chalaby, Chair, Finance Committee of the Board</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Xavier Calvez, Chief Financial Officer</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Samiran Gupta, ICANN India</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">All other members of Staff involved in accounting and financial tasks<span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: center; "><strong>Sub: Request for granular income/revenue statements of ICANN from 1999-2014</strong><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Earlier this month, on 3 December 2014, Mr. Samiran Gupta presented CIS with detailed and granular information regarding ICANN’s domain names income and revenues for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014. This was in response to several requests made over a few months. The information we received is available on our website.<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The information mentioned above was, <i>inter alia</i>, extremely helpful in triangulating ICANN’s reported revenues, despite and in addition to certain inconsistencies between the Annual Report (FY14) and the information provided to us.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We recognize that ICANN makes public its current and historical financial information to a certain extent. Specifically, its Operating Plan and Budget, Audited Financial Statements, Annual Reports, Federal and State Tax Filings, Board Compensation Report and ccTLD Contributions Report are available on the website.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">However, a detailed report of ICANN’s income or revenue statement, listing all vendors and customers, is not available on ICANN’s website. Our research on accountability and transparency mechanisms in Internet governance, specifically of ICANN, requires information in such granularity. <strong>We request, therefore, historical data re: income and revenue from domain names (1999-2014), in a manner as detailed and granular as the information referenced in FN[1]</strong>. We would appreciate if such a report lists all legal entities and individuals who contribute to ICANN’s domain names income/ revenue.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We look forward to the receipt of this information within the stipulated period of 30 days. Please feel free to contact us in the event of any doubts regarding our queries.<span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Thank you very much.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Warm regards,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Geetha Hariharan</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Centre for Internet & Society</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">W: <a href="http://cis-india.org">http://cis-india.org</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN Response</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ICANN's response to CIS's request can be <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-response-21jan15-en.pdf"><strong>found here</strong></a>. A short summary of our request and ICANN's response may be found <a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/table-of-cis-didp-requests/at_download/file"><strong>in this table (Request S. no. 2)</strong></a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<hr size="1" style="text-align: justify; " width="33%" />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> See <i>ICANN reveals hitherto undisclosed details of domain names revenues</i>, <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-receives-information-on-icanns-revenues-from-domain-names-fy-2014">http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-receives-information-on-icanns-revenues-from-domain-names-fy-2014</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> See <i>Historical Financial Information for ICANN</i>, <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/historical-2012-02-25-en">https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/historical-2012-02-25-en</a>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-2'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-2</a>
</p>
No publishergeethaICANNDIDPTransparencyAccountability2015-03-05T08:07:02ZBlog EntryDIDP Request #1: ICANN's Expenditures on "Travel & Meetings"
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-1-icanns-expenditures-on-travel-meetings
<b>CIS sent ICANN a request under its Documentary Information Disclosure Policy, seeking details of expenditure by ICANN at its Meetings. CIS' request and ICANN's response are detailed below. </b>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; "></h2>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; "></h2>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">CIS' Request</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>18 December 2014</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">To:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Cherine Chalaby, Chair, Finance Committee of the Board</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Xavier Calvez, Chief Financial Officer</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mr. Samiran Gupta, ICANN India</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">All other members of Staff involved in accounting and financial tasks</p>
<p style="text-align: center; "><strong>Sub: Request for itemized details of expenditure by ICANN at its Meetings</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We would like to thank Mr. Calvez and Mr. Gupta for providing information regarding ICANN’s domain name revenues for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014.<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> We would like to request further information through the DIDP.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In the Audited Financial Statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, the “statements of activities” provides Total Expenses (for ICANN and New gTLD) as USD 124,400,000.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013, the Total Expenses (ICANN and New gTLD) noted is USD 150,362,000.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">According to the statement, this covers expenses for Personnel, Travel and meetings, Professional services and Administration. Quarterly Reports note that the head “Travel and meetings” includes community support requests.<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> In addition to these heads, Quarterly Reports include “Bad debt expenses” and “Depreciation expenses”. The manner of accounting for these is explained in <span>Note 2</span> to the Notes to Financial Statements.<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> Note 2 explains that the expenses statement is prepared by “functional allocation of expenses” to identifiable programs or support services, or otherwise by methods determined by the management.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">For the purposes of our research into normative and practised transparency and accountability in Internet governance, we request, to begin with, <i>current and historical</i> information regarding itemized, detailed expenses under the head “Travel and meetings”. We request this information from 1999 till 2014. We request that such information be categorized and sub-categorised as follows:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Total and Individual Expenses for each meeting (categorised by meeting and year):</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>1. Total and individual expenses for ICANN staff (differentiated by department and name of each individual attending the event, including dates/duration of attendance);</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Also broken down into each individual expense (flights, accommodation, per diem or separate local transport, food and other expenses).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Each ICANN staff member who attended the event to be named.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">2. <span>Total and individual expenses for members of ICANN Board (listed by each Board member and dates/duration of attendance);</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Broken down into each individual expense (flights, accommodation, per diem or separate local transport, food and other expenses).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Each Board member to be named.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>3. Total and individual expenses for members of ICANN constituencies (ALAC, ATRT, ccNSO, GAC, GNSO, etc.)</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Broken down into each individual expense (flights, accommodation, per diem or separate local transport, food and other expenses).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Each attendee for whom ICANN covered expenses to be named.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>4. Total and individual expenses for ICANN fellows</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Broken down into each individual expense (flights, accommodation, per diem or separate local transport, food and other expenses).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Each attendee for whom ICANN covered expenses to be named, including their region and stakeholder affiliation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">5. <span>Total and individual expenses incurred for any other ICANN affiliate or liaison (ISOC, IETF, IAB, etc.)</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Broken down into each individual expense (flights, accommodation, per diem or separate local transport, food and other expenses).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Each attendee for whom ICANN covered expenses to be named, including their affiliation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">6. <span>Total and individual expenses incurred for any other person, whether or not directly affiliated with ICANN</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Broken down into each individual expense (flights, accommodation, per diem or separate local transport, food and other expenses).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">- Each attendee for whom ICANN covered expenses to be named, including their affiliation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Please note that we request the above-detailed information for ICANN meetings, and also other meetings for which ICANN may provide financial support (for instance, CWG-Stewardship or CWG-Accountability). We request, as a preliminary matter, a list of </span><i>all meetings</i><span> to which ICANN provides and has, in the past, provided financial support (1999-2014).</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We note that some information of this nature is available in the Travel Support Reports.<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> However, the Travel Support Reports are available only from 2008 (Cairo meeting), and are not available for ICANN48 to ICANN51. Further, the Travel Support Reports do not exhibit the level of granularity necessary for research and scrutiny. As explained above, we request granular information for all meetings.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In our view, providing such information will not violate any individual or corporate rights of ICANN, its Staff, Board, Affiliates/Liaisons or any other individual. Public corporations and even private organisations performing public functions may be subjected to or accept an increased level of transparency and accountability. We believe this is of especial importance to ICANN, as it is involved in a process to enhance its accountability, intrinsically related to IANA Stewardship Transition. We expressed similar views in our initial comment to “Enhancing ICANN Accountability”.<a href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> Increased transparency from ICANN may also address accountability concerns present across stakeholder-groups both within and outside ICANN.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We await your favorable response and the requested information within the prescribed time limit. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any clarifications.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Thank you very much.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Warm regards,</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Geetha Hariharan</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Centre for Internet & Society</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">W: <a href="http://cis-india.org">http://cis-india.org</a></p>
<p> </p>
<h2>ICANN's Response</h2>
<p>ICANN responded to the above request for information within the stipulated time of 30 days. <strong><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cis-response-17jan15-en.pdf">ICANN’s response is here</a></strong>. A short summary of CIS's request and ICANN's response can be found <a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/table-of-cis-didp-requests/at_download/file"><strong>in this table (Request S. no. 1)</strong></a>.</p>
<p> </p>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<p><a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> See <i>ICANN reveals hitherto undisclosed details of domain names revenues</i>, <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-receives-information-on-icanns-revenues-from-domain-names-fy-2014">http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-receives-information-on-icanns-revenues-from-domain-names-fy-2014</a>.</p>
<p><a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> See <i>ICANN Financial Statements As of and For the years ended June 30, 2014 and 2013</i>, pages 7, 19-20, <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun14-en.pdf">https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/financial-report-fye-30jun14-en.pdf</a>.</p>
<p><a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> For instance, see <i>ICANN FY14 Financial Package: For the nine months ending March 2014</i>, pages 2-5, <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/package-fy14-31mar14-en.pdf">https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/package-fy14-31mar14-en.pdf</a>.</p>
<p><a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> <i>Supra</i> note 1, page 14.</p>
<p><a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> See Community Travel Support, <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/travel-support-2012-02-25-en#reports">https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/travel-support-2012-02-25-en#reports</a>.</p>
<p><a href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> See CIS Comments on Enhancing ICANN Accountability, <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-comments-enhancing-icann-accountability">http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-comments-enhancing-icann-accountability</a>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-1-icanns-expenditures-on-travel-meetings'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/didp-request-1-icanns-expenditures-on-travel-meetings</a>
</p>
No publishergeethaICANNDIDPTransparencyAccountability2015-03-05T08:00:36ZBlog Entry