You are here: Home / Internet Governance / Blog / DIDP Request #13: Keeping track of ICANN’s contracted parties: Registries

DIDP Request #13: Keeping track of ICANN’s contracted parties: Registries

Posted by Asvatha Babu at Jul 28, 2016 03:40 PM |
Filed under: , ,
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.

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:

  1. 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).
  2. A generic template of the notice served by ICANN before conducting such an audit.
  3. A list of the registries to whom such notices were served in the last year.
  4. An account of the expenditure incurred by ICANN in carrying out the audit process.
  5. A list of the registries that did not respond to the notice within a reasonable period of time.
  6. Reports of the site visits conducted by ICANN to ascertain compliance.
  7. Documents which identifies the registry operators who had committed material discrepancies in the terms of the contract.
  8. Documents pertaining to the actions taken in the event that there was found to be some form of contractual non-compliance.

The DIDP request filed by Padmini Baruah can be viewed here.

What ICANN said

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.[1]

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: 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:

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:

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.[2]

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.

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?  

ICANN’s response to our request can be found here.

[1]. See Contractual Compliance website:

[2]. See FY15 budget (pg72):

Filed under: , ,



Asvatha Babu

Asvatha Babu is a Master’s candidate in the International Communication program at American University's School of International Service in Washington D.C. Her research interests include using ICTs for inclusive development, internet governance and cyber security. Thus far, her work with CIS has dealt specifically with ICANN’s transparency and accountability policies. She tweets about tech and feminism at @fireflyclass.