[Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - bylaws changes

ALAIN AINA aalain at trstech.net
Fri Oct 7 17:51:39 UTC 2016

> On Oct 3, 2016, at 9:48 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 19, 2016, at 3:08 AM, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net> wrote:
>>> On 19 Sep 2016, at 13:08, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello Alan,
>>> One point I observed has not been captured in the summary (which i also suggested), was to limit the Independent Director seat to "at most" one per region at any given time. This will address a possible situation where we end up having 4 directors from a region.
>> I don’t think that’s an accountability issue.  Even in the unlikely event that there are four from the same sub-region (regional director, two non-regional directors, and CEO), and that the four conspire together to advance some sort of sub-regional interest that’s against AFRINIC’s interest, the four would still not form a majority of the Board.
> They could, however, easily form a majority of quorum at a meeting where two directors are absent and depending on the particular voting rules of the board when 7 members and the CEO are present, possibly even one absence would be sufficient.

I also support this point as it is aligned with the proposals made at https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000343.html <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000343.html>

section 5
> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of
> Directors who may work for the same organisation.
> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit
> should be.

We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and
skills so a better managed succession process is a must.  I propose with
the exclusion of the CEO that we have

-  Max 1 per org/company
-  Max 1 per country
 - Max 2  per region

 - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory
relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its
Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country.

- not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a
candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one
domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to
analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the
company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established,
and/or any other relevant data shall be considered;

 - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.

"Not more than 2 directors may be domiciled in the same region". As each region has by default a regional director, it can’t have more than one non regional director.

>> Instead of legislating geographical diversity in the Bylaws, I would prefer to rely on the membership to consider all kinds of diversity when voting.
> I agree with this.

The geographical  diversity is part of AFRINIC foundation as the best representation structure  which matches  this RIR service region  rich in history and cultural, linguistically and economically diverse.This is why the bylaws prescribed geographical diversity for the BoD. It has be the same for the non-regional if we agree to move and not depend on membership votes...

>> Remember that Bylaws changes need a 75% majority.  Would adding geographical restrictions to the non-geographical seats have enough support to pass?
> I’m actually not sure how you would reliably enforce such a provision in a fair and equitable manner. For example, if due to resignation, both non-geographic seats came available at the same time, would you limit to one candidate per region? If not, then what if the vote result had an equal number of votes for two candidates from the same region and they had the most votes? Which candidate would you disqualify in favor of the third-place candidate?

The election mechanism for the GC members seems to address your question; In your second scenario, but did not foresee the tie in the votes. 
http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/governance-committee/1889-election-and-nomination-process <http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/governance-committee/1889-election-and-nomination-process> section 8.4 (d)

The solution for the scenario you described would be that in case of vote equality for 2 from the same region, have other rounds of vote until one wins.

Hope this helps


> Owen
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20161007/1d9af304/attachment.html>

More information about the Community-Discuss mailing list