[rpd] Proposal Update received: Anti-Shutdown

[Ayitey Bulley]

>
> Afrinic's staff assessment of version 1 of the policy proposal [1]
> stated the following:
>
>     - It's not clear that the measures suggested in the proposal are
>       within AFRINIC’s mandate.
>

I agree that suggested measures are not within AfriNICs mandate.

> This brings back to "whether it is our problem or not". It has been
> discussed [2] earlier. Internet shutdowns hinder the development of
> internet in the African region. Doesn't it go against the mission
> statement [3] of Afrinic.
>


AfriNICs Mission:

"To serve the African Community by providing professional and efficient 
management of Internet number technology usage and development, and 
promoting Internet self-governance."

How does an "Internet shutdown" go against the above mission statement?

> The assessment further states that:
>
>     - Affected government may retaliate against AFRINIC members, or
>       against AFRINIC itself.
>     - Uninvolved parties could be punished simply because they have a
>       relationship with the government.
>
> As long as we have "punitive" measures against governments the above
> might not be addressed. Now, whether we will have an effective
> anti-shutdown policy without sanctions would depend on a government's
> attitude towards "freedom".
>

Are you serious? You want to go against governments because you have 
been entrusted with the responsibility of allocating resources that 
don't belong to you?



> Legal counsel commented the following:
>
>     a. There is a possibility that AFRINIC may have to face civil suits
>       in multiple jurisdictions where the sanctions proposed (at 13.1 &
>       13.2) are implemented.
>
>     c. Any government of a sovereign State has at its disposal, within
>        its Constitution and the laws made thereunder, the possibility to
>        raise such defenses as confidentiality, Official Secrets Act,
>        State Defence, public safety or public order to justify any of
>        its acts/omissions.
>
> Part a) of the comments would be concerns due to the sanctions. Those
> sanctions have implications to which governments could retaliate. It
> might address this issue if we tone down on the sanctions part. Question
> is, should we do it?
>

And who is supposed to pay for the policing of Governments? Are you 
going to use your members money to pay for legal representation during 
civil suits in multiple jurisdictions?

And where will you find the money to pay damages to governments if you 
are found to have wrongfully withdrawn services that members have paid 
for in advance?


> As for part c) my opinion remains same, that we leave interpretation of
> the laws to the courts whether the government should be given green
> light for "shutting down" the internet.
>
> We need a widely accepted definition of an internet shutdown and I
> believe this policy provides that. Getting it do more than that will
> require widespread support against government censorship.
>

It is not AfriNICs responsibility nor mandate. Let us walk away from this..