<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Barbara Mittleman asks:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHw4TV2ZMd7ULn4HB10L0P6wb2WkOyfFxfmc5cQ=uLi_SOzX6Q@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><i>Does ICANN have a policy for the constituent
groups which covers, e.g., ICANN Board of Director's
responsibilities for financial oversight and auditing as
relates to the subgroups; conflicts of interest, finances and
fund raising; autonomy of the SGs with respect to finances;
how the groups' finances and fund-raising fit with the
not-for-profit status under US/CA law (governing law for
ICANN)? </i><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Response: <br>
<br>
Barbara, having only been Treasurer for less than a week, and with
no prior NCSG Treasurer to call on and no prior documents from the
office, I can only give a tentative answer to your question, and the
short answer is "NO!". ICANN's multistakeholder process is not only
unique in terms of policy making on a global scale, its structures
are unique as well. There is a potentially deep well of consulting
income here for lawyers <span class="moz-smiley-s7"><span>:-\</span></span>
to get a longer answer to your question but, from what I can gather,
constituency groups and support groups, while chartered from within
the ICANN process, are not subject to the oversight and auditing one
would expect for -as you put it- "subgroups" within an organization.
In some ways the organizational link between NCSG, IPC, GAC, etc. is
more like the one where independent groups are accredited to
participate in the meetings of various UN and multilateral agencies,
except that within ICANN they also constitute the core of the policy
making process. SGs and CGs are not administrative subgroups within
ICANN as I understand it. <br>
<br>
This may well be as it has to be, with accountability resting within
the subgroups. I cannot imagine ICANN having oversight over how
Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC), GAC, or other groups
within ICANN raise, administer and use funds within their respective
work. Since many of those groups also engage in lobbying in various
national settings, the one set of U.S. laws that would likely apply
would be those requiring ICANN to register as a lobbyist for foreign
powers, including some with which the U.S. may not have friendly
relations. I don't think anybody wants to go in that direction.
There may be a small piece of "lawyer work" for ICANN to clarify
that CG's and SG's operate financially completely independent of
ICANN, just to clear the situation there. The various Executive
Committees may want to address that question. <br>
<br>
I am proceeding as NCSG Treasurer on the assumption that each of
NCSG, NCUC and NPOC is internally accountable to itself, and
recommending an annual report as simply a best practice for
accountability to our members and sources of funding.<br>
<br>
Sam Lanfranco, Treasurer, NCSG<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>