[Community-Discuss] Faulty result for Western Africa in AfriNIC AGMM Elections
walu.john at gmail.com
Thu Jun 14 05:46:59 UTC 2018
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:58 PM Bope Christian <christianbope at gmail.com>
> Dear AFRINIC Members and Community,
> There has been much discussion about the results of the elections held
> during the AGMM on 10 May 2018, and associated processes.
> I will try to answer these questions:
> - What is the election process?
> - What happened in previous years?
> - What happened in 2018?
> - What does the election process says about the “None of the above”
> - How should the result be interpreted when “None of the above”
> receives the most votes?
> - Does AFRINIC have an election appeal process?
> - Should the result stand as previously announced?
> - What are the future actions?
> ## What is the Election Process?
> The Election Process (sometimes called the election guidelines) is
> approved by the Board in terms of the Bylaws article 13.2:
> 13.2. The election of the Directors of the company shall be carried out
> in line with the Election process approved by the Board.
> The current Election Process was revised and approved by the Board in 2014
> (Resolutions 201404.196 and 201411.218)*, *and is published at <
> Under section 9.2, the following bullet points appear (the bullet numbers
> are not in the original):
>  • Voters should only vote for one candidate per category/region. Each
> mark on a ballot paper represents one vote. A ballot with more than one
> mark per category/region will be considered spoilt, and not be counted.
>  • The ballot paper should provide voters with the option to not vote
> for any candidate (a.k.a. "None of the Above").
>  • This will be a secret ballot election. An inclusion of any personal
> data on the ballot paper will invalidate the vote and will be counted as
>  • Elections will be closed as soon as the last member or proxy
> present in the meeting room casts his/her vote. Candidates with the highest
> number of votes in each category will be declared winners.
>  • In the event of a tie for an open position, voting for that
> position will be repeated (Only by paper ballot) the same day until there
> is a winner.
>  • All open positions shall be subject to an election process even if
> there is only one candidate. In that event, if the option [none of the
> above] got more votes than the only candidate, then the seat shall be
> considered vacant and the Board will be requested to apply provisions of
> the Bylaws to temporarily fill the vacant seat.
> ## What happened in previous years?
> The option to vote for “None of the above” has appeared on AFRINIC Board
> election ballots every year since 2013. In 2017, the final computed results
> contained scores for the “None of the above” option. Since those scores did
> not make “none of the above” the winner, they were not mentioned in the
> announcement of results published at <
> ## What happened in 2018?
> Three AFRINIC Board seats were up for election at the AGMM on 10 May
> 2018. For all three seats, “None of the above” received the most votes,
> and as a consequence, the seats have remained vacant for the time being.
> This was the first time that ”None of the above” received the most votes
> for any Board seat. The result was announced during the AGMM and later
> published at <
> https://afrinic.net/en/news/2391-results-of-afrinic-agmm-elections >
> ## What does the election process say about the “None of the above” option?
> Bullet point 2 in the election process specifies that “None of the above”
> should appear as a choice for all seats, not only for seats where there is
> only one candidate.
> Bullet point 4 in the election process specifies that the candidate with
> the highest number of votes will be the winner. However, it is silent
> about what happens if the highest number of votes goes to “None of the
> above” instead of a candidate.
> Bullet point 6 in the election process specifies what happens when “None
> of the above” gets the highest number of votes in an election with only one
> candidate, but is silent about seats with multiple candidates.
> In summary, the election process is clear about what happens in an
> election with one candidate when “None of the above” wins, but is silent
> about what happens in an election with more than one candidate when “None
> of the above” wins.
> ## How should the result be interpreted when “None of the above” receives
> the most votes?
> It is a widely-accepted principle that, if a written process is silent on
> some point, then the intent should be considered.
> The intended meaning of the “None of the above” option is clear in the
> case of an election with only one candidate: bullet point 6 states that, if
> “None of the above” gets the most votes, then the seat remains vacant.
> In an election with multiple candidates, we have already seen that bullet
> point 2 requires a “None of the above” option, but it is silent about what
> happens if that option receives the most votes. Some people have argued
> that the seat should remain vacant (pointing to the intent behind bullet
> point 6), and some have argued that the winner should be the candidate
> other than “None of the above” who received the most votes (pointing to the
> text of bullet point 4).
> The fact that bullet point 2 explicitly requires a “None of the above”
> option for all seats, suggests that the intention was for “None of the
> above” to have a meaning different from an abstention. After all, if
> voting for “None of the above” was intended to have the same meaning as an
> abstention, then there would be no need for a “None of the above” option on
> the ballot, and voters could simply abstain from voting for that seat.
> ## Does AFRINIC have an election appeal process?
> There isn’t any documented process for appealing the result of an AFRINIC
> Board election. The committee handling the election (Nomination committee
> and Election committee) should make sure that the election guideline is
> explain clearly to members before the process start in order to avoid
> ## Should the result stand as previously announced?
> The Board recognises the objections that were raised a few days after the
> election, on Wednesday 16 May 2018, but notes that no objections were
> raised on the day of the election, Thursday 10 May 2018. The Board has
> decided that the results stand as they were announced immediately after the
> votes were counted. That means that the affected seats remain vacant for
> the time being.
> ## What are the future actions?
> The Board recognises that the process does not make it clear what happens
> when “None of the above” receives the most votes in an election with
> multiple candidates. The Board would like to encourage the committee
> handling the election in future to ensure that members understand the
> election guidelines before voting starts. Furthermore, the Board intends to
> review the election process for future elections which will include a
> public consultation. The Board will also consider an appeal process during
> the review of the guideline
> The Board intends to fill the vacant seats in terms of the Bylaws article
> 13.14. To this end, the Board has called for expressions of interest; see <
> <https://www.afrinic.net/en/news/2395->>. The seats to be filled are the
> three seats that were included in the election on 10 May 2018, and a fourth
> seat that was not included in that election.
> Best Regards,
> Christian D. Bope, Ph.D
> Chairman, AFRINIC Board
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Community-Discuss