A/HRC/42/48 accommodation in often expensive locations and so on), especially those of small size or from the global South. Furthermore, external funding is reportedly scarce, which negatively affects the diversity of participants. 46 As a result, it is mostly a certain “elite” of civil society – highly professional organizations with funds – that is able to participate in those processes, largely excluding representatives from most underrepresented groups at the grass-roots level. A representative from a G20 youth group gave a particularly grim account of youth’s financial dependency. In addition, invitations to civil society participants and registration information are sometimes issued quite late, though the calendar of meetings is known in advance, resulting in increased cost of participation.47 The Independent Expert notes the good practice of the World Bank in providing funds for civil society participation in its annual meetings. 47. As for IMF, the aforementioned meetings between civil society organizations and executive directors are attended by up to 700 organizations, the majority of which come from North America and Europe. IMF has therefore developed a fellowship programme for civil society organizations that are mainly from developing and emerging economies. 48 (c) Visas 48. The timely issuance of visas for participants, especially those from developing countries, has also been identified as a cause of concern. The situation is affected by delays in applying for visas, owing to uncertainty as to whether funding will be made available but also to the late issuance of invitations, in addition to the potential plain refusal to grant visas.49 Another issue of concern is potential travel bans imposed on participants in their home countries. (d) Access to information 49. One of the recurrent concerns that the Independent Expert heard was a lack of transparency with regard to access to information. Unlike G77, there is no permanent official website for G7 and G20 that provides easy access to information relevant to decision-making processes: every presidency establishes its own website, which is no longer updated once the presidency has ended. As a result, information is scattered across several different websites.50 The same applies to BRICS.51 50. The Independent Expert is aware that the University of Toronto is the depository of all documents posted on the websites of the G20 presidencies. While this is a laudable initiative, he believes that it should be the responsibility of G20 to take on this task. He also notes the good practice of the German G20 presidency, which compiled all existing anticorruption commitments into one location, and the Argentinian G20 presidency’s initiative to collate all the commitments on its presidency’s official website.52 (e) Internet access and connectivity 51. Information and communications technology is increasingly used by engagement groups, such as Civil 20 and Women 20, to allow remote participation by the public with a view to discussing and developing policy recommendations. This is certainly a positive development, especially in light of the difficulties in securing funding for in-person participation and other travel-related issues. However, this limits remote public participation to individuals and organizations that can afford access to the Internet, often unlike grass-roots organizations, in particular from the global South. In addition, online 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 12 See the submissions by Amnesty International, Conectas Direitos Humanos, Patrick Bond and Transparency International. See the submission by Transparency International. IMF, “2015 guidelines”. See the submissions by ActionAid, Amnesty International and Patrick Bond. See the submission by Transparency International. At the time of writing, the information portal infoBRICS.org was not complete or up to date. See the submission by Transparency International.