Re: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] PDP practice of confidential reports on public policy mattes is inappropriate

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

>From what I have been told in various conversation with board members over the 
>years, and a few conversations I had with Board chairs, if one assumes that 
>there is at least one confidential report per issue the Board acts upon, one 
>would not be exaggerating.

a.

On 8 Dec 2009, at 17:33, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:

> 
> I did not know there was such a thing as a confidential Board report from
> Staff.  I do not see how such a mechanism can possibly fit within ICANN's
> mission, at least wrt any such report regarding a policy matter.
> 
> Perhaps we should hear from Staff as to what sorts of confidential reports
> they have been sending, and how often, so we can have a more educated
> discussion on this point.
> 
> Mike Rodenbaugh
> RODENBAUGH LAW
> 548 Market Street
> San Francisco, CA  94104
> (415) 738-8087
> http://rodenbaugh.com 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 8:25 AM
> To: Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] PDP practice of confidential reports on public
> policy mattes is inappropriate
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I would think that in most cases any of this confidential information could
> be segregated into a confidential appendix.
> 
> I think that one of the review mechanisms being set up for Board
> accountability would be able to handle appeals on Freedom of ICANN
> Information to insure that things deemed confidential by the Staff actually
> merited the designation.  The degree to which this was done could also be
> reviewed as part of AoC 9.1 Ensuring accountability, transparency and the
> interests of global Internet users.
> 
> It probably goes without saying that I support a statement that nothing
> except for a very small set of confidential information should be made
> public.
> 
> One other question is whether we believe that this information should be
> vetted before submission to the Board, made public at the same time it is
> given to the Board or released with the Board's decision.  I tend toward's
> the earlier, the better, though believe the council  specifically needs to
> vett it.
> 
> a.
> 
> On 8 Dec 2009, at 17:11, James M. Bladel wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Agree, Jeff.
>> 
>> And may also suggest we add an exception for any report that contains
>> confidential information regarding contract negotiations or vendor
>> selection that are ongoing, and could be adversely affected by
>> disclosure.
>> 
>> Thanks--
>> 
>> J.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: RE: [gnso-ppsc] RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] PDP practice of 
>> confidential reports on public policy mattes is inappropriate
>> From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue, December 08, 2009 9:59 am
>> To: "Diaz, Paul" <pdiaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 
>> "Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks all. Is there anyone that disagrees?
>> 
>> The one caveat I would give to everything being disclosed is if there is
>> TRULY legal advice given to the Board or issues relating to personnel
>> matters, then that would not need to be disclosed to the public.
>> However, there would need to be review to ensure that only true legal
>> advice and personnel matters are redacted.... For those of us in the
>> United States, it would be akin to the Freedom of Information Act and
>> having independent review of the courts to make sure that the US
>> Government is revealing all information except those allowed to be
>> confidential under the law.
>> 
>> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
>> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
>> 
>> 
>> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
>> the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
>> and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
>> have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
>> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
>> notify us immediately and delete the original message.
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Diaz, Paul
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 10:37 AM
>> To: Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: Alan Greenberg
>> Subject: RE: [gnso-ppsc] RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] PDP practice of
>> confidential reports on public policy mattes is inappropriate
>> 
>> 
>> I support Alan's comments below.
>> 
>> Paul Diaz
>> Policy & Ethics Manager
>> Network Solutions, LLC
>> ________________________________________
>> From: owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
>> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 11:12 PM
>> To: Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-ppsc] RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] PDP practice of
>> confidential reports on public policy mattes is inappropriate
>> 
>> I strongly support Robin's comment. 
>> 
>> If the main issue is (as has been claimed) that the full PDP report is
>> too onerous, then we need to be told what the targets are for an
>> acceptable length Board report so that the WG can create it. In the end,
>> the current "confidential" report is likely to be written by the same
>> policy staff who assisted the WG in its deliberations and in writing its
>> report.
>> 
>> If staff must also provide some sort of confidential advice to the Board
>> in its deliberations, that is fine, but it should be an addition to the
>> report (condenced or otherwise) send by the GNSO, not a substitute for
>> it.
>> 
>> Alan
>> 
>> At 07/12/2009 09:21 PM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks Robin for this comment.  Robin brings up a point that was
>> discussed on the last call.  I know the registry constituency has
>> expressed a similar sentiment. It would be great for others to weigh in
>> on this as well.
>> 
>> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
>> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
>> 
>> 
>> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
>> the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
>> and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
>> have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
>> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
>> notify us immediately and delete the original message.
>> 
>> 
>> From: owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx [
>> mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robin Gross
>> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 6:06 PM
>> To: Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: PPSC
>> Subject: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] PDP practice of confidential reports on public
>> policy mattes is inappropriate
>> 
>> I do not believe there should be a standard practice for the ICANN staff
>> to send the ICANN Board a confidential report to accompany the public
>> report. which the GNSO approves of.
>> 
>> I'm especially concerned since we hear the board often only reads the
>> staff prepared report, which means the community really has no idea what
>> the staff is saying to the board, and thus upon what information
>> decisions are being made.
>> 
>> Certainly there can be exceptional circumstances when there is a
>> legitimate reason to provide confidential advice to the board from the
>> staff - but that should be on a case by case basis, where legitimate
>> need is demonstrated.  However a standard PDP practice of a private
>> report on policy matters goes against all of ICANN's promises about
>> being transparent in its policy process.   It is time to put an end to
>> the practice of confidential reports on matters of public deliberation.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>> 
>> 
>> IP JUSTICE
>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org      e: robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
>