existing capacity to conduct monitoring and assessment in the ICT space, with the recognition that assessment would have to parallel a gradual learning process, evolving
alongside the GNI and company implementation. During the first phase, the board
develops independence and competence criteria for monitor selection as well as operational guidance for assessors, while the companies initiate implementation of the Principles, and the organization focuses on learning and outreach.
The second phase expects the companies to have fully implemented the Principles
and provided a detailed report of its internal processes to the organization. Based on
this report, an assessor (or team, more likely) who meets the GNI’s criteria and is
selected by a company will review that company’s processes in operation. In preparing
their report, assessors draw upon other relevant materials from the company, except in
cases of reasonable legal limits to disclosure, preservation of attorney-client privilege,
or protection of trade secrets.
In addition to facilitating the assessment process, the organization will review the accountability process with an eye to necessary improvements, while also informing the
board of the results of individual assessments. In conjunction with GNI participants,
the organization develops ‘‘clear, achievable guidelines’’ for compliance with the next
phase of assessment based on experience to date.
In the third phase, the board accredits a pool of eligible assessors, identifying any concerns related to independence for particular companies, and companies draw from this
pool, with the board resolving any resulting concerns. With GNI’s guidance, the assessor goes beyond process, examining actual incidents and company responses to government requests, providing recommendations for improvement and a detailed report
to the GNI on the company’s implementation of the Principles. Based on this and accounting for any changes the company has made in response to the findings, the
board will determine whether the company meets GNI expectations and share that
finding publicly.
As in the previous phase, companies may choose to withhold certain information
based on legal limitation (as in the case of a national security letter), for the preservation of attorney-client privilege, or to protect trade secrets, but will be expected to provide as much information as possible as to any specific limitations on their responses.
Withholding and the reasoning behind it will be reported and factored into the findings and may render the assessor unable to certify compliance.
Criticisms and Challenges
Lackluster Participation
As varied as the group is in many respects, the Global Network Initiative clearly lacks
culturally and geographically diverse participation, and is likewise limited in terms of
the range of participating organizations within sectors, and companies in particular,
Protecting Privacy and Expression Online
97
alongside the GNI and company implementation. During the first phase, the board
develops independence and competence criteria for monitor selection as well as operational guidance for assessors, while the companies initiate implementation of the Principles, and the organization focuses on learning and outreach.
The second phase expects the companies to have fully implemented the Principles
and provided a detailed report of its internal processes to the organization. Based on
this report, an assessor (or team, more likely) who meets the GNI’s criteria and is
selected by a company will review that company’s processes in operation. In preparing
their report, assessors draw upon other relevant materials from the company, except in
cases of reasonable legal limits to disclosure, preservation of attorney-client privilege,
or protection of trade secrets.
In addition to facilitating the assessment process, the organization will review the accountability process with an eye to necessary improvements, while also informing the
board of the results of individual assessments. In conjunction with GNI participants,
the organization develops ‘‘clear, achievable guidelines’’ for compliance with the next
phase of assessment based on experience to date.
In the third phase, the board accredits a pool of eligible assessors, identifying any concerns related to independence for particular companies, and companies draw from this
pool, with the board resolving any resulting concerns. With GNI’s guidance, the assessor goes beyond process, examining actual incidents and company responses to government requests, providing recommendations for improvement and a detailed report
to the GNI on the company’s implementation of the Principles. Based on this and accounting for any changes the company has made in response to the findings, the
board will determine whether the company meets GNI expectations and share that
finding publicly.
As in the previous phase, companies may choose to withhold certain information
based on legal limitation (as in the case of a national security letter), for the preservation of attorney-client privilege, or to protect trade secrets, but will be expected to provide as much information as possible as to any specific limitations on their responses.
Withholding and the reasoning behind it will be reported and factored into the findings and may render the assessor unable to certify compliance.
Criticisms and Challenges
Lackluster Participation
As varied as the group is in many respects, the Global Network Initiative clearly lacks
culturally and geographically diverse participation, and is likewise limited in terms of
the range of participating organizations within sectors, and companies in particular,
Protecting Privacy and Expression Online
97