[rpd] PDWG situation without co-chairs

[Daniel Yakmut]

The interpretation of this "The Committee therefore determines that a 
recall of both the co-Chairs is justifiable in the
circumstances, and that both the co-Chairs be recalled with immediate 
effect." I understand the statement "...the co-chairs *be* recalled" as 
awaiting further action statement, but if the statement is "...the 
co-chairs*are* recalled" this could be a definitive statement.

However, natives or experts of English Language can advise better, 
alternatively we can hear from Legal Counsel the interpretations.


Cheers

Daniel

On 09/02/2021 10:54 am, Timothy Ola Akinfenwa wrote:

> +1 Dewole

> ..."*and determine the outcome.*"

> That settles it, at least for now!

>

> Best!

> Tim <./a>

>

> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 10:50 AM Dewole Ajao via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net 

> <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> wrote:

>

>     Boss, it's the process - and it's been written that way for years

>     in plain sight.

>

>      1. Anyone may request the recall of a Working Group Chair at any

>         time, upon written request with justification to the AFRINIC

>         Board of Directors. The request must be supported by at least

>         five (5) other persons from the Working Group. *The AFRINIC

>         Board of Directors shall appoint a recall committee*,

>         excluding the persons requesting the recall and the Working

>         Group Chairs. *The recall committee shall investigate* the

>         circumstances of the justification for the recall *and

>         determine the outcome.*

>

>     The *emphasis *in there is mine. It might be beneficial to the

>     working group if you or any others could offer alternative

>     interpretations of those sentences so we can look at them together

>     now rather than waste energy litigating (Assuming it becomes clear

>     who will be suing who :-P).  I believe the process to appeal the

>     contents of the PDP is proposing new policy text and convincing

>     the group that the text should be changed.

>

>     Regards,

>     Dewole.

>

>     On 2/9/2021 10:18 AM, Daniel Yakmut via RPD wrote:

>>     This interpretation is subjective, and it is totally wrong and

>>     draconian for the committee to have the powers of investigation,

>>     judgement and execution.

>>

>>     If truly the Recall committee is this powerful then the process

>>     will have be appealed and it is a subject of litigation.

>>

>>     Simply,

>>     Daniel

>>

>>     On Tue, Feb 9, 2021, 10:05 AM Alan Barrett <apb.goo at gmail.com

>>     <mailto:apb.goo at gmail.com>> wrote:

>>

>>         Dear PDWG,

>>

>>         On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 at 00:51, Fernando Frediani

>>         <fhfrediani at gmail.com <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>> wrote:

>>         > No Daniel, the output of the Recall Committee regarding the

>>         > Co-Chairs is already final (read point 19 from their report)

>>         > according to whats the CPM says about it, so it does not

>>         > have to be approved by anyone, not even the Board itself.

>>         >

>>         > So currently we don't have any Co-Chairs.

>>

>>         Yes, as far as I understand, the Recall Committee's decision

>>         is final.

>>         Article 3.5(3) of the CPM gives the Recall Committee the power to

>>         "determine the outcome", not merely to suggest or report to

>>         some other

>>         party. The Board also stated "The Recall Committee will

>>         report the

>>         outcome to the Policy Development Working Group. The decision

>>         of the

>>         Recall Committee is final."  (That is in a document from the

>>         Board

>>         that might not have been published, but is referenced from

>>         page 3 of

>>         the Recall Committee's Working Procedure document.)

>>

>>         The Recall Committee gave their decision in paragraph 19 of

>>         the "Final

>>         Determination" document:  "19. The Committee therefore

>>         determines that

>>         a recall of both the co-Chairs is justifiable in the

>>         circumstances,

>>         and that both the co-Chairs be recalled with immediate effect.".

>>

>>         > What the Committee has mentioned in the document is for the

>>         > Board to lead the election of the new Co-Chairs and determine

>>         > the transition during this interim.

>>

>>         Yes, the last sentence of paragraph 20 of the Recall Committee's

>>         report is a suggestion; it is not binding:  "The Committee

>>         suggests

>>         that the Board coordinate with the PDWG to find an adequate

>>         transition

>>         mechanism until the next election."

>>

>>         Regards,

>>         Alan Barrett

>>

>>         _______________________________________________

>>         RPD mailing list

>>         RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

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

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

>>

>>

>>     _______________________________________________

>>     RPD mailing list

>>     RPD at afrinic.net  <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

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

>

>     -- 

>     Regards,

>

>     Dewole.

>

>     _______________________________________________

>     RPD mailing list

>     RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

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

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

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210209/4a8068a0/attachment-0001.html>