Letter to ICANN

Göran Marby CEO and President Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) CC: Steve Crocker Chairman of the Board of Directors ICANN Karen Mulberry Director, Strategic Initiatives ICANN Dear Mr. Marby, We are writing to you as organisations and individuals working on global transparency issues. We work with a range of actors, including governments, inter-governmental organisations, international financial institutions, private corporations and civil society organisations, to design and implement transparency policies. We believe that, as the body responsible for critical functions of the global Internet, ICANN’s legitimacy is predicated on accountability, both to its stakeholders and to the public at large. This, in turn, requires robust transparency so that anyone who is interested can obtain accurate, timely and complete information about ICANN’s activities. ICANN’s accountability mechanisms are hollow without robust policies for providing information about the context underlying critical Internet governance debates. We welcome the Cross-Community Working Group process which is currently taking place to improve ICANN’s transparency policies, particularly the Documentary Information Disclosure Policy (DIDP). Long experience shows that a robust requesting system is the only way to ensure that the public is able to obtain an unvarnished picture of an organisation’s operations. Although the DIDP has many positive aspects, we note that it also has significant problems when assessed against international standards. These include overly broad exceptions, many of which do not include any requirement for harm. As a result, the current DIDP allows for information to be withheld even where staff find that its disclosure would be completely harmless. The current phrasing of the public interest override is also problematical, insofar at it allows for withholding information whenever staff feels an interest against disclosure should prevail, effectively extending significantly the list of defined exceptions. There is no reason why all of the interests which need to be protected against disclosure cannot be clearly and comprehensively enumerated within the DIDP, as is done within national access to information laws. There is also a significant need to clarify and improve the procedures for receiving and processing requests, including by establishing binding timelines for response, and to strengthen information management, including through a duty to document. We are pleased to note that these issues are addressed by the present CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 2 draft Recommendations. Indeed, these Recommendations, if implemented, would transform ICANN into a global model for transparency and openness. We would like to express our support for the draft Recommendations, and would urge that ICANN move to implement them speedily once the consultation process has been completed. Yours sincerely, Organisations 1. Access Info Europe, Spain 2. Affinity Group of National Associations, Global 3. Africa Freedom of Information Centre, Uganda 4. African Foundation for Environment and Development, Nigeria 5. AfroLeadership, Cameroon 6. ARTICLE 19, United Kingdom 7. Association For Promotion Sustainable Development, India 8. Association pour le Développement Intégré et la Solidarité Interagissante, Cameroon 9. Burundi Child Rights Coalition, Burundi 10. Care for the Elderly Intellectuals, Azerbaijan 11. Campaign for Freedom of Information, United Kingdom 12. Campaign for Freedom of Information in Scotland, United Kingdom 13. Center for Independent Journalism, Romania 14. Centre for Law and Democracy, Canada 15. Center for Media Studies and Peacebuilding, Liberia 16. Centre 17. 18. Capacitación y promoción de la Democracia, El Salvador 19. COLLECTIF 24, Democratic Republic of Congo 20. Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, India 21. Concertation Nationale de la Société Civile (CNSC-TOGO), Togo 22. ControlaTuGobierno, Mexico 23. Foro Permanente de Organizaciones de Sociedad Civil (FPOSC), Honduras 24. Freedom Forum, Nepal 25. Ghana Association of Private Voluntary Organisations in Development, Ghana 26. Hui E! Community Aotearoa, New Zealand 27. Hyphen Media Institute, Malawi 28. Institute for Development of Freedom of Information, Georgia 29. Institute for Research, Advocacy and Development, Pakistan 30. Integrity Watch Afghanistan, Afghanistan 31. Iraqi Journalists Rights Defense Association, Iraq 32. Journalists Union of Malawi, Malawi 33. Lawyers for Human Rights, Moldova 34. Local Initiatives, Liberia 35. Media Initiative for Open Governance in Uganda, Uganda 36. Myanmar Media Lawyers’ Network, Myanmar 37. National Campaign for People's Right to Information, India 38. Open Democracy Advice Centre, South Africa 39. Open Knowledge Foundation, Germany 40. Open State Foundation, The Netherlands 41. OpenMedia, Canada 42. Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement - Nueva Vizcaya Chapter (PRRM-NV), Philippines 43. Red Latinoamericana y del Caribe para la Democracia (Redlad), the Americas 44. Right to Know Coalition of Nova Scotia, Canada 45. Society for Democratic Initiatives, Sierra Leone 46. Stephanie Peacebuilding and Development Foundation, Nigeria 47. Sunlight Foundation, United States 48. Tajikistan National NGO Association, Tajikistan 49. The BIHA Project, Nigeria 50. The Center for Media Studies and Peacebuilding, Liberia 51. THE THING, NYC, United States 52. Triumphant Hand of Mercy Initiative, South Africa 53. Vouliwatch, Greece Individuals 1. Florencio B. Abad, Founding Steering Committee Member, Open Government Partnership, Convenor, Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency, Philippines 2. Govinda Acharya, Practitioner - Democracy and Governance, Nepal 3. Dr. David Goldberg, Director Project Forsskal, United Kingdom 4. César Noguera, Asociación Venezolana de Servicios de Salud de Orientación Cristiana, Venezuela 5. Amal Sharma, Software Engineer, India 6. Abdulganiyu Rufai Yakub, Program Officer, Center for Information Technology and Development, Nigeria