Re: [gnso-ppsc-wg] Your feedback requested - section 6.2.3.4. SOI and DOI

["S. Subbiah" <subbiah@xxxxxxxxx>]

CG point:  We need to clarify.

INTA point 1) Yes I think the word Interest being chanegd in one may 
solve the problem. The problem is what "word" - perahps "Potential 
Conflicts" ?
point 2) I am not sure about the need to point to documents you have 
published before but I think stating when/where else have you served in 
WG's before etc or commitess - all within ICANN - is a reasonable request.
point 3) pointing out possible conflict of interest is a reasonable 
reuest and we should entertain it
point 4) I guess we need to have some sort of punishment - I guess Chair 
and Liasion Review and then sent to CO and if found guilty - asked to 
either correct disclourse immediately and/or suspended from WG. Appeals 
clearly possible thru usual mechanism. My two cents.

Marika Konings wrote:

> *6.2.3.4.        Statements of Interest (SOI) and Disclosure of 
> Interest *[As developed by the OSC GNSO Operations Work Team. To be 
> cross-referenced and updated once Operations Work Team has finalized 
> the language]
> This section will contain guidelines relating to the elements and 
> content of SOIs that each member of the WG is required to supply to 
> the team. The following template has been developed by the OSC GNSO 
> Operations Work Team (version April 2010):   
>
>    1. Please identify your current employer(s) and position(s).
>    2. Please identify your declared country of residence, which may be
>       the country to which you pay taxes.
>    3. Please identify the type(s) of work performed at #1 above.
>    4. Please identify any ownerships, investment interests, or
>       compensation arrangements by answering the following three
>       questions:   (i) Do you have any ownership or investment
>       interest, excluding ownership of a de minimis number of shares
>       in a publicly traded company, in any entity with which ICANN has
>       a transaction, contract, or other arrangement (e.g. Registries,
>       Registrars, Consultants, etc.)?  Please answer “yes” or “no.”
>        If the answer is “yes,” please provide the name of each entity
>       for which such an interest exists.   (ii) Do you have a
>       compensation arrangement with any entity or individual with
>       which ICANN has a transaction, contract, or other arrangement
>       (e.g. does the Relevant Party have a consulting arrangement with
>       a Registrar)?  Please answer “yes” or “no.”  If the answer is
>       “yes,” please provide the name of each entity for which such an
>       arrangement exists.  (iii) Do you have potential ownership or
>       investment interest in, or compensation arrangement with, any
>       entity or individual with which ICANN is negotiating a
>       transaction, contract, or other arrangement?  Please answer
>       “yes” or “no.”  If the answer is “yes,” please provide the name
>       of each entity for which such a potential ownership, interest,
>       or arrangement exists.
>    5. Are you participating in the GNSO policy process as a
>       representative of any individual or entity, whether paid or
>       unpaid?  Please answer “yes” or “no.”  If the answer is “yes,”
>       please provide the name of the represented individual or entity.   
>    6. Please identify any other relevant arrangements, interests, or
>       benefits as requested in the following three questions:   (iv)
>       Do you have any type of commercial or non-commercial interest in
>       ICANN GNSO policy development processes and outcomes?  Please
>       answer “yes” or “no.”  If the answer is “yes,” please describe
>       the commercial or non-commercial interest in ICANN GNSO policy
>       development processes and outcomes.  (v) Are there any
>       arrangements/agreements between you and any other group,
>       constituency or person(s) regarding your participation as a work
>       team member?  Please answer “yes” or “no.”  If the answer is
>       “yes,” please describe the arrangements/agreements and the name
>       of the group, constituency, or person(s).   (vi) Do you receive
>       any tangible or intangible benefit from participation in ICANN
>       GNSO policy development processes and outcomes?  For example, if
>       you are an academic or NGO and use your position to advance your
>       ability to participate, this relationship should be disclosed in
>       the Statement of Interest just as should employment by a
>       contracted party or a business relationship with a
>       non-contracted party that has an interest in policy outcomes.
>        Please answer “yes” or “no.”  If the answer is “yes,” please
>       describe the tangible or intangible benefits.    
>
> Disclosure of Interest   A Relevant Party shall provide a Disclosure 
> of Interest setting forth any direct or indirect interests that may 
> affect a Relevant Party’s judgment on an issue that is under review, 
> consideration, or discussion. Additional requirements that should be 
> considered by the chartering organization include where SOIs are to be 
> submitted/posted, indication that only one SOI is needed per 
> individual, and important characteristics of SOIs such as being 
> complete and current. It should be made clear that WG participants are 
> expected to update their SOI during the course of a WG if there are 
> any significant changes.  Further guidance is provided in section 
> 2.1.2 of the GNSO Working Group Guidelines on how to deal with any 
> participant that does not provide an SOI despite multiple requests and 
> reminders.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Comments:
> *
> CG: Under Disclosure of Interest, there is reference to “the Working 
> Groups Operating Model Guidebook”. Is that referring to this document 
> or to some other document. It would be helpful to clarify.
>   
> INTA: The difference between the “Statement of Interest” and 
> “Disclosure of Interest” is not entirely clear (even after reviewing 
> footnotes 1 and 2). To avoid confusion, the Committee recommends:
> · That these terms either be combined into a single term and concept, 
> or the distinction between them should be made more clear throughout 
> (perhaps through eliminating the use of the word “interest” in both 
> labels, which is confusing given that the intended meaning of the word 
> is different in each context).
> · some additional information should be required from potential WG 
> members in this regard, including disclosure of other committees, 
> organizations, working groups, etc. that the prospective member serves 
> on (or has served on) within the same field, as well as any relevant 
> publications that the person has authored or been involved in.
> · in the “Disclosure of Interest” section, specifically requesting 
> information about any interests that could present, or give the 
> appearance of presenting, a conflict of interest in connection with 
> the member’s work as part of the Working Group, and possibly provide 
> some examples.
> · specifying consequences of a member’s failing to provide a complete 
> or accurate disclosure.