That's perfectly acceptable. I don't mind such exceptions. But this is contrary to the principles of confidentiality and decentralization. It seems to me that the money invested in ICO should help in the implementation of the necessary project. The government's obligation is to ensure that potential beneficiaries of the exemption list are not allowed to use their money. Why their work should be done by the ICO?
The governments of the world implements their policy through intermediaries of the financial system across the world. So banks, financial institutions like exchanges, etc do the grunt work through KYC norms. Invariably, you will see ICOs being subject to such regulations as well. Telegram's ICO is not small - it is the largest ever and there will be many governments watching to see if illegally-earned money of money from sanctioned individuals flows into it.
