[rpd] Statement for legal Counsel

[Kakel Mbumb]

Bonjour chers tous,

Je ne.me fatiguerai pas à continuer à nous demander de rester objectif sur
la manière avec laquelle nous nous.adressons mutuellement.

Ayons du respect mutuel pour tout un chacun. S'il s'avère que des
accusations présomptueuses sont tournées vers un individu ou un groupe des
membres de la communauté, il est impérieux que nous puissions en apporter
des preuves et surtout s'adresser à tout un chacun de façon respectueuse.

Chacun peut défendre sa position librement sans que cela ne nécessite que
l'on s'insulte mutuellement. Nous sommes des responsables et personnalités
de différents acabits et rangs. Restons objectifs et maîtrisons notre dose
de subjectivité.

Cordialement.

Le lun. 14 déc. 2020 à 10:07, <rpd-request at afrinic.net> a écrit :


> Send RPD mailing list submissions to

>         rpd at afrinic.net

>

> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

>         https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

>         rpd-request at afrinic.net

>

> You can reach the person managing the list at

>         rpd-owner at afrinic.net

>

> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

> than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."

>

>

> Today's Topics:

>

>    1. Re: Statement from Legal Counsel (Frank Habicht)

>    2. Re: Statement from Legal Counsel (JORDI PALET MARTINEZ)

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Message: 1

> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 07:52:50 +0300

> From: Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz>

> To: rpd at afrinic.net

> Subject: Re: [rpd] Statement from Legal Counsel

> Message-ID: <5232276b-9f07-b9b4-b23e-3a8cce94f136 at geier.ne.tz>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

>

> Hi,

>

> just one thing...

>

> On 14/12/2020 00:29, Paschal Ochang wrote:

> > Dear Community,

> >

> > I?d like to point out the following remarks:

> ...

> > 4.For the Resource Transfer Policy, the co-chairs stepped back by

> > extending the last call period and allowing the community more

> > discussion time (which was requested by members of the community), which

> > renders the appeal invalid.

>

> Ehm....  no.

>

> Appeal is still valid.

>

> Frank

>

>

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Message: 2

> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:06:24 +0100

> From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>

> To: "rpd >> AfriNIC Resource Policy" <rpd at afrinic.net>

> Subject: Re: [rpd] Statement from Legal Counsel

> Message-ID: <4347733C-9E5F-43F1-AD25-C6882147E6F7 at consulintel.es>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

>

> Even better than that. The Board Prerogatives Policy allows the bylaws to

> be as they are right now. Otherwise, the bylaws are against the PDP and

> clearly AFRINIC has not and can?t have any superior power on top of the

> community!

>

>

>

> Regards,

>

> Jordi

>

> @jordipalet

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> El 13/12/20 22:39, "Paschal Ochang" <pascosoft at gmail.com> escribi?:

>

>

>

> Dear Community,

>

>

>

> I?d like to point out the following remarks:

>

> 1.??????????? Any legal mentions in the email regarding the PDWG are

> invalid and deemed wrong since Afrinic?s work and operations are a separate

> entity from the PDWG. Basically, in the PDP, the CPM is its bible and the

> community is its god. Law has no relevance at all, as Jordi said, the CPM

> must be SELF-CONTAINED.

>

> 2.??????????? Nowhere in the CPM does it state that the co-chairs cannot

> respond to the authors of the policies appealed. As said before, only the

> CPM rules in the PDP and nothing else such as ?the legal principle of

> pendente lite? as clearly AFRINIC is not a court.

>

> 3.??????????? There has been no request from the community for Afrinic?s

> legal assessment. This a breach of the CPM (3.4/3.4.1). Unless someone from

> the Afrinic Board can justify who requested for their judgement, the legal

> assessment should be disregarded for its violation of the CPM.

>

> 4.??????????? For the Resource Transfer Policy, the co-chairs stepped back

> by extending the last call period and allowing the community more

> discussion time (which was requested by members of the community), which

> renders the appeal invalid. As for the final decision on consensus, it is

> still valid since it has not being filed for an appeal in the 2 weeks

> period that has followed.

>

> 5.??????????? The Board Prerogatives Policy has reached consensus smoothly

> and was neither appealed nor challenged. The community always comes first

> and Afrinic must adapt its bylaws so as to satisfy the community?s needs,

> as simple as it is.

>

> 6.??????????? We are today facing an unprecedented situation. The very

> foundation of RIR system?s legitimacy, the bottom up process, is at risk.

> if AFRINIC ltd is being viewed as directly interfering with community and

> co-chairs?s independence, a potential interpretation of top-down approach,

> Governments and ITUs could come along and claim the very legitimacy of  RIR

> system(the community and its bottem up process) no longer exists, arguing

> that the system itself no longer serves its function and should be

> dissolved.

>

>

> On Sunday, December 13, 2020, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:

>

> Dear Sunday

>

>

>

> We saw in communication from legal, discussions between CEO and cochairs

> about  2 proposals which were recently in last call  with the outcome we

> all know.

>

>

>

> The WG was not informed by the cochairs  about  the origin  and

> motivations of these discussions.

>

>

>

> I could not imagine ceo/legal intervening  in discussions on proposals

> without  WG or co-chairs request..  thus I query for information about what

> it is going on.

>

>

>

> Regards

>

>

>

> --

>

> Arnaud

>

>

>

> Le dim. 13 d?c. 2020 ? 13:50, Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com> a

> ?crit :

>

> Dear Arnaud,

>

> I must have missed some embedded message in the Legal Counsel's email.

>

> Can you please point out the relevant line in the Legal Counsel's email,

> that seems to say, or suggest that a recommendation was made to the Board

> by the Co-Chairs, that the PDWG is not aware of. This will help me make a

> better interpretation of the Email and its content.

>

> Thank you.

>

> Sunday.

>

> On 12/13/20 11:35 AM, Arnaud AMELINA wrote:

>

> Hello, PDWG members

>

>

>

> It appears in recent communications from legal counsel that co-chairs have

> recommended some draft policies for approval by board.

>

>

>

> Why are the recommendations, including the reports prescribed by section

> 3.4.4, not published on this rpd for the sake of transparency and the

> practices in the matter?

>

>

>

> Where did the resource transfer proposal version 5.0 come from?

>

>

>

> We seem to have abandoned the PDP and its key underlining principles.

>

>

>

> Regards

>

>

>

> --

>

> Arnaud

>

>

>

> Le mer. 9 d?c. 2020 ? 16:25, Ashok <ashok at afrinic.net> a ?crit :

>

> Dear Community members,

>

> I refer to AFRINIC?s Chief Executive Officer?s emails dated 30 November

> 2020 and 03 December 2020 sent to the PDWG?s Co-Chairs to which I was in

> copy thereof. Copies of the said emails are also herewith attached.

>

> As AFRINIC?s Legal Counsel I wish first to draw your attention to the

> PDWG?s Co-Chairs? declaration of consensus dated 07 October 2020 in respect

> of the policy entitled 'Board's Prerogatives' ? AFPUB-2020-GEN-004-DRAFT02-

> as well as the policy entitled 'Resource Transfer Policy'

> ?AFPUB-2019-V4-003-DRAFT04- whereby in the latter case, consensus was

> initially declared on 07 October 2020 and which was subsequently reversed

> by the Co-Chairs on 17 October 2020.

>

> I hold no mandate to interfere in the work of the PDWG and/or its

> independence I shall refrain from doing so.

>

> Nevertheless, I deem it my duty to tender my advice, for whatever it is

> worth and without in any way pressurising, the PDWG, an AFRINIC-related

> body to be bound by same.

>

> My advice addresses the aforementioned two policy proposals  and my

> purpose is to ensure that the work of the PDWG thereon  as well as its

> outcome are both legally in order. I have given anxious consideration to

> this matter and also bear in mind that where the acts and doings of the

> PDWG are not legally in order, same may have a detrimental effect on the

> image and reputation of AFRINIC both as a corporate body and responsible

> RIR.

>

> In regard to the policy entitled 'Board's Prerogatives', I have taken note

> of AFRINIC's Staff Assessment report dated 04 November 2020 -

> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2020-gen-004-d2#impact.

>

> You may have noticed that the said report has raised both serious

> governance and operational issues as well as areas of uncertainty observed

> in the proposed policy which has, up to now, remained unaddressed.

>

> Consequently, it is my humble view that the PDWG may in its wisdom

> consider to review its own stand in respect of these policy proposals so as

> to avoid any form of encroachment, potential or otherwise,  onto the Board

> of Director?s prerogatives, the foundations of which are grounded in

> articles 3.4 and 15 of the AFRINIC?s bylaws.

>

> However, should the PDWG maintain its stand in respect of the above, then

> the appropriate motion has to be made during an AGMM, pursuant to Article

> 7.7 of the bylaws to amend articles 3.4, 15(1), 15(2) and 15(3) of the

> bylaws thus allowing the powers of the Board of Directors to be subjected

> to the directives and guidance of the PDWG.

>

> As regard the policy entitled 'Resource Transfer Policy', the PDWG may be

> aware that the said policy (i.e. version 4 thereof) is presently the

> subject of an appeal before the Appeal Committee and the matter is yet to

> be determined.

>

> Consequently, the PDWG is hereby informed and advised that it is a matter

> of sound and settled legal principle that, pending the outcome of the

> Appeal Committee proceedings, it (PDWG) refrains from entertaining any

> request emanating from the relevant co-authors of the said policy proposals

> for further amending these proposals on the legal principle of pendente

> lite. It is also my considered view that any attempt in the meantime by the

> latter to submit a newly purported version of their policy proposal will be

> inadmissible (non-receivable) in law.

>

> To close my submission may I urge the PDWG to give due weight to my

> non-binding legal advice and consequently appreciate the real risk of

> AFRINIC, in the event that the Appeal proceedings are ignored, having to

> ratify and implement two policy proposals, on the same subject matter,

> which would lead to an unprecedented conflictual situation.

>

> Ashok.B.Radhakissoon.

>

> Legal  Counsel

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>

>

> --

> Kind regards,

>

> Paschal.

>

> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>

>

>

> **********************************************

> IPv4 is over

> Are you ready for the new Internet ?

> http://www.theipv6company.com

> The IPv6 Company

>

> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or

> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of

> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized

> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this

> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly

> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the

> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or

> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including

> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal

> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this

> communication and delete it.

>

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL: <

> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20201214/277a207b/attachment.html

> >

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Subject: Digest Footer

>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>

>

> ------------------------------

>

> End of RPD Digest, Vol 171, Issue 46

> ************************************

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20201215/5e285f35/attachment-0001.html>