Search RPD Archives
[rpd] APPEAL AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF CONSENSUS DECLARED BY THE POLICY LIAISON TEAM AND THE BOARD ON THE SELECTION OF PDWG CO-CHAIRS
Okoye Somtochukwu
somtovalentine94 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 23 12:12:00 UTC 2021
Dear Community,
In my opinion, I believe we should have a chance to appeal and contest the boards' decisions on the selection of co-chairs. A democratic government does not function when citizens are deprived of their right to free speech, protests tec. in the same vein, we should also have a say in appealing against the decision made by the board against the co-chairs.
Also, The appeal against the board on the selection of the co-chairs is valid. Although it is only rational that we look into this issue and try to assess the situation as it is. This is because, although the board has acted in carrying out its duties and that of the co-chairs, I don't feel it is right for the board to have a consensus regarding the selection of the co-chairs.
In all our doings, we must treat each other's duties and positions with the utmost respect and do our best to move the community forward.
Thank you.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 23, 2021, at 1:57, Paschal Ochang <pascosoft at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello all.
>
> It's very simple. Has an appeal been lunched ? The answer is yes. So let the Appeal Committee do their job. It's simple.
>
>> On Thursday, April 22, 2021, Haruna Umar Adoga <hartek66 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> If we decide to proceed with the confirmation of the newly ‘selected’ Co-chairs, which some say were chosen based on a ‘consensus’ by the PDWG, it will be a step in the wrong direction.
>>
>> I personally do not subscribe to the idea of wasting the community’s time on frivolous issues but an appeal has been made against the confirmation of the Co-chairs and it needs to be addressed.
>>
>> We cannot and should not keep supporting this narrative as PDWG members, that whenever someone or a group of persons question an act/decision that needs clarification, we tend to push things under the carpet intentionally by throwing all sorts of tantrums rather than facing the issues in an upright manner.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Haruna.
>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 9:30 AM Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> In the Spirit of Law, what is not authorised, is forbidden. Don't fool people here please. An other waist of time to the Community . The Co-chairs selection is over. Now we invite Co-chairs to take the place and start working, in order to avoid such kind of waist of time. Please, let move forward.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Arnaud
>>>
>>>> Le jeu. 22 avr. 2021 à 02:38, lucilla fornaro <lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>
>>>> As we can all see, it is true that the CPM (3.5) openly mentions the appeal against the co-chairs, but it doesn’t forbid other forms of appeals. Furthermore, the appeal reports a serious matter that should be properly investigated. This is the only way to go through it.
>>>>
>>>> In particular, I believe that the declaration of the consensus by the Board of Directors goes beyond their authority.
>>>> Therefore, I support this appeal.
>>>>
>>>> Lucilla
>>>>
>>>>> Il giorno mer 21 apr 2021 alle ore 14:18 Emem William <dwizard65 at gmail.com> ha scritto:
>>>>> Dear Appeal Committee,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please check the attachment for our appeal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject : Appeal against the confirmation of consensus declared by the Policy Liaison Team and the Board on the selection of PDWG Co-chairs
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Appeal Committee,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am appealing against the confirmation of consensus declared by the AFRINIC team and the Board on the selection of PDWG Co-chairs, made on the RPD mailing list, on April 9th and April 11th.
>>>>>
>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013018.html)
>>>>>
>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013052.html)
>>>>>
>>>>> I consider that the actions of the Board of Directors to self-declare consensus over the PDWG matter in selecting the new co-chairs is done outside of their scope of power and prerogatives.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Date of the appeal : April 19th, 2021
>>>>>
>>>>> Date of the decision made by the Policy Liaison Team
>>>>> (1) 3rd April 2021
>>>>> (2) 9th April 2021
>>>>> Date of the decision made by the Board of Directors
>>>>> 11th April 2021
>>>>> f) Reference to an announcement of decision which is being appealed
>>>>> (1) 26th March 2021, Eligibility criteria imposed by Policy Liaison Team
>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/012768.html)
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) 9th April 2021, Policy Liaison Team announced consensus is achieved
>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013018.html)
>>>>>
>>>>> (3) 11th April 2021, Board Chair declared consensus
>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013052.html)
>>>>>
>>>>> Name and email address of complainant.
>>>>> Emem William
>>>>> dwizard65 at gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Names of complainants.
>>>>> 1. Olamide Andu (olamideandu at gmail.com)
>>>>> 2. Yusuf Abdurahman Adebisi (adebc007 at gmail.com)
>>>>> 3. Emem Ekpo William (dwizard65 at gmail.com)
>>>>> 4. Sunday Ayuba (sundayayuba8 at gmail.com)
>>>>> The following appeal addresses the “fake consensus on the selection of the co-chairs” declaration, which according to the CPM, cannot be done by anyone else besides the chair. Yes In this situation we agreed that AFRINIC team should serve as secretariat but this team went ahead to selectively implement decisions even when there was no consensus. The board’s interference with the matter signifies that the bottom up process no longer exists. Therefore, this appeal should serve the Appeal Committee in taking into account a very important point, which is the fact that the board has no right in declaring consensus.
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on the Board’s action of declaring consensus on the selection of the co-chairs, which is done outside of their prerogatives, it is safe to conclude that the declaration of consensus is illegal as it is not within the prescribed power and prerogatives of the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors should have referred to and comply with the stipulated terms of the AFRINIC’s constitution and the CPM and ensure that any action that is taken by the Board of Directors is done consistently and in compliance with the stipulated terms of the AFRINIC’s Constitution and the CPM, which was not the case. The declaration of the consensus by the Board of Directors shows that the Board of Directors have acted above and beyond their prescribed power and prerogatives.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As for the list of requirements and qualifications imposed by the Policy Liaison Team, It is vital to note that they were never stipulated under the CPM. By simply adding on a list of requirement and qualification proves that the Policy Liaison Team have acted arbitrarily and with blatant disregard to the terms and procedures which are clearly stipulated under the CPM.
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on the above, I urge the Appeal committee to look into this serious matter and resolve this appeal by standing with what is right.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Emem William.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210423/4ce565c7/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list