[Community-Discuss] Controversial anti-shutdown policy discussed at RIPE

[Badru Ntege]

Ish 

And you think you have the ability or power to influence any state by this policy ???

This policy is actually doing more Harm to Afrinic than any potential good.  

An image the leadership need to work hard to recover as we work on the real Vision of Afrinic 

“Spearheading Internet technology and policy development in the African region”

And the Mission 

“To serve the African community by providing professional and efficient management of Internet number resources, supporting Internet technology usage and development, and promoting a participative and multi-stakeholder approach to Internet self-governance.”

The above two guiding principles of our organization are very clear about participative engagement.


So I re-stress my point.  Unless we plan to change the vision and Mission, this policy should never have passed the PDP process in the form it was presented.

Badru

 







On 5/14/17, 11:18 AM, "Ish Sookun" <ish at lsl.digital> wrote:

>Hi Tutu,
>
>On 14/05/17 01:01, Tutu Ngcaba wrote:
>> 
>> Do you know who appointed the supreme court in country... Its the president.
>> 
>
>The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa [1] says:
>
>  174 (3) The President as head of the national executive, after
>          consulting the Judicial Service Commission and the leaders of
>          parties represented in the National Assembly, appoints the
>          Chief Justice and the Deputy Chief Justice and, after
>          consulting the Judicial Service Commission, appoints the
>          President and Deputy President of the Supreme Court of Appeal.
>
>> So you think the judge will stop govermment when chaos is happening.
>> 
>
>The Constitution also says:
>
>  165 (2) The courts are independent and subject only to the
>          Constitution and the law, which they must apply impartially
>          and without fear, favour or prejudice.
>
>      (3) No person or organ of state may interfere with the functioning
>          of the courts.
>
>> Tell me one example where govermment or president order shutdown when no
>> riot or chaos or protesting of the people. Tell me...
>> 
>
>In 2007 access to Facebook [2] was disrupted in Mauritius because of a
>fake profile of the then prime minister of Mauritius. There were no
>riot, protest or chaos in Mauritius.
>
>In 2012 a state-run ISP [3] in Tajikistan blocked Facebook after
>comments were made on the president. There did not seem to be protests
>or riots in Tajikistan to have caused the ban.
>
>In 2010 a South Korean state agency blocked [4] the North Korean's state
>account on Twitter. No riots or protests caused that.
>
>> You only thinking ooh the government shut it or they blocked it
>> 
>
>No. I am thinking the government blocking the internet has implications
>on freedom of speech and access to information. You mentioned riots and
>chaos. An internet ban during the times of « chaos » sounds similar to
>being shut in a dark room.
>
>> You are not thinking why they government they do it when it was all ok and
>> all citizen enjoyed it freely.
>> 
>
>Governments could argue they are preventing the spread of
>misinformation. In trying to do so by blocking the internet they end up
>hurting the economy and prevent access to information (e.g on cases of
>abuse). Meanwhile misinformation could still be spread through other
>means. If propaganda can leverage on the internet, it can also leverage
>on other (non-electronic) communication mediums. Blocking the internet
>does not stop propaganda.
>
>> Why why why please tell me before you pretending to be in American where
>> the Trump say no refugee and that judge is saying yes refugee yet they
>> America will have the powerful software to spy of the people like the
>> swoden brother who wll go to prison but kept in the russia. Where is the
>> freedom.
>> 
>
>Snowden stood against a privacy abuse.
>
>Thinking that we should not discuss & look for a remedy to internet
>shutdowns because the governments are too powerful, would be a wrong
>thing. One could argue that the RPD is not the place to discuss about
>actions "against governments". I believe though that the RPD can discuss
>internet shutdowns & look for remedy, where the remedy might not
>necessarily be a punitive measure against a government.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ish Sookun
>
>[1]
>http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/constitution/SAConstitution-web-eng.pdf
>[2]
>https://www.lexpress.mu/article/maurice-censure-le-site-communautaire-%C2%ABfacebook%C2%BB
>[3]
>http://www.reuters.com/article/net-us-tajikistan-facebook-idUSBRE8AQ0JY20121127
>[4] http://mashable.com/2010/08/19/north-korea-twitter-banned/#zoPCks5drqq9
>
>_______________________________________________
>Community-Discuss mailing list
>Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss