[rpd] New Policy Proposal - "Anti-Shutdown (AFPUB-2017-GEN-001-DRAFT-01)"

Wed Apr 12 05:20:11 UTC 2017

Hello Andrew,

I think we should be very very careful not to play on one another's
emotions and shoot ourselves in the foot in the process. My earlier text
was very very clear about how opposed I am to government interference in
the open nature of the internet. What I do not agree with is trying to
address this through RIR policy by banning/restricting current and future
AFRINIC members related to government. It is just unthinkable/impractical
and unfair. Thank god you also confirm that such list can be a long one
(which further confirms my initial message).

That said, the substansive issue regarding RIR roles towards
avoiding/reducing the occurrences of shutdown remains a discussion we
should have. I have suggested some points in my previous mail and like I
said it should be one of the concerns that AFRINIC takes to govt whenever
they have an opportunity to do so. AFGWG is one of such avenue, AFRINIC
training team occasionally do serve governmental entities and that may also
be an avenue to raise the concern, other avenues includes various
government focused events.

Another thing that comes to mind is whether AFRINIC as an organisation can
endeavour to send a formal letter of concern to governments whenever her
members formerly notify them of imminent shutdowns. That does not require a
policy to achieve as staff can produce a guideline (perhaps in consultation
with the community) to receive such complains from members with appropriate
triggers inplace to warrant AFRINIC's formal action.

I hope this helps clarify things; i expect significant number of us here
feel the same way as you with respect to shutdowns. However there is a
proverb that says "if we are to burn a snake in its length we will burn the
house as well". We should be very careful what we ask at RIR policy level
because in the long run, it would not hurt the government more than AFRINIC
members(current and future).

Overall the solution to this problem should be within each state
legislation and policies and I also believe that service providers
themselves can indeed play a significant role locally in reducing such
occurrences.

Regards

On Apr 12, 2017 4:05 AM, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
wrote:

> Seun,
>
>
>
> Firstly, thank you for your comments.
>
>
>
> Let me attempt to respond….
>
>
>
> I believe that the fundamental question this policy asks goes actually
> beyond the issue of shutdowns – it goes to a question that has been lurking
> in the background for a long time and I believe the time is now to have
> that discussion.  What role do the community, the I* organizations and
> other internet structures have when faced with abuse of power by state
> actors.  When do we stop hiding behind our “neutrality” and actually stand
> up for what is right and make our voices heard.  Do we wait for the silver
> bullet to solve all our problems, or do we as a community use every tool in
> our arsenal to chip away at the issue until eventually things change?
>
>
>
> Do we stand by while in country branches of other I* organizations stake
> their claim not against, but in FAVOUR of such actions as has happened
> recently, while the parent organization is taking an opposite stance?
>
>
>
> For myself, and I believe my co-authors, if you see an abuse being
> committed, and  you close your eyes and close your ears and walk on by,
> saying, its not my problem, I will not step in here, I will leave it to
> someone else to deal with.  That does not make you neutral – it makes you
> complicit.  When good men refuse to act – evil thrives.
>
>
>
> We talk about engagement and statements – yet year after year after year
> we see these shutdowns becoming more and more commonplace.  As per the
> report by the centre of technology innovation at brookings, in 1995 we saw
> ONE incident of governments interfering with digital communications.  By
> 2010 that number had grown to 111 incidents, and still it grows.  It cost
> the African economies in a year in excess of $355 million USD, that
> directly hits the people, and the providers in those countries who are
> members of the RIR system.
>
>
>
> We can choose to sit on the fence – close our eyes – and say its someone
> else’s problem and wait for someone, somewhere, to say enough is enough –
> or we can use every tool in our arsenal to chip away at the problem until
> it is finally solved.  I believe the latter approach is the right one –
> however small the action taken, every one counts.
>
>
>
> As regards to there being no organization called government, you will
> notice that the policy refers to the state and to parastatals – those
> organizations owned and controlled by government.   There are LARGE numbers
> of those as AfriNIC members – including the regulators, the incumbent
> telcos, the utility companies, it’s a long list.  So its VERY possible to
> do this.
>
>
>
> It could also be argued that by shutting down the internet – it verges on
> a violation of the RSA which says that you may not interfere with the
> rights of others to use their resources as assigned – that is a debatable
> point because of how it is worded – but so be it.
>
>
>
> As I said – for me – I choose not to sit on the fence – I choose to say I
> stand for a free and open internet – and for me and my co-authors – what we
> believe we have done by putting this policy out there is to offer the
> opportunity for this community to make a choice – take a stand for the free
> and open internet and send a message that what we have been seeing will not
> be tolerated – or close our eyes and pretend its someone else’s problem,
> and pretend that its to dangerous an issue to engage on, and refuse to
> realize our own capabilities to fight back, and in my personal view, become
> complicit.
>
>
>
> I know where I stand.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, 12 April 2017 at 00:38
> *To: *rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [rpd] New Policy Proposal - "Anti-Shutdown
> (AFPUB-2017-GEN-001-DRAFT-01)"
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> While internet shutdown remains what AFRINIC and other I* organisations
> should speak against, I do not believe that addressing this via an RIR
> policy is the right nor a practical way to do this.
>
>
>
> The policy is simply proposing to ban certain AFRINIC members, even though
> those members have nothing to do with government's (usually the presidency)
> decision to shutdown internet. Based on the current wording of the
> proposal, such members could include federal/state establishments like
> institutions, ministries, RENs, federal and state development agencies et
> all who will perhaps hear the news of the ban just like any other person
> (and ofcourse may have been unable to do anything even if they had prior
> knowledge).
>
>
>
> Overall, the fact that there is NO member within AFRINIC database called
> "government" makes this proposal impractical.
>
>
>
> Nevertheless, like I have said earlier, continuous effort needs to be made
> towards campaigning/educating against shutdowns and perhaps AFRINIC as an
> organisation can further engage/contribute to respective governmental
> policies in the region (cybersecurity policies for instance).
>
>
>
> May be something for the AFGWG to consider.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2017 19:44, "SamiSalih" <sami at ntc.gov.sd> wrote:
>
>
> Dear AFRINIC PDWG Members,
>
> Greetings,
>
> We have received a new policy Proposal - "Anti-Shutdown
> (AFPUB-2017-GEN-001-DRAFT-01)"
>
> From the following Authors:
> a) Andrew Alston  – Liquid Telecommunications -
> andrew.alston at liquidtelecom.com
> b) Ben Roberts    – Liquid Telecommunications -
> ben.roberts at liquidtelecom.com
> c) Fiona Asonga   – TESPOK                    – tespok at tespok.co.ke
>
> Published in this link
>
> https://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/
> policy-proposals/2061-anti-shutdown-01
>
> Best Regards,
>
> PDWG Co-chairs
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20170412/e0ff5cb5/attachment-0001.html>