<div>Dear Community,</div><div><br></div><div>I’d like to point out the following remarks:</div><div>1.<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>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.</div><div>2.<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>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.</div><div>3.<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>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.</div><div>4.<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>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.</div><div>5.<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>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. </div><div>6.<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>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.</div><br>On Sunday, December 13, 2020, Arnaud AMELINA <<a href="mailto:amelnaud@gmail.com">amelnaud@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">Dear Sunday</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">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.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The WG was not informed by the cochairs about the origin and motivations of these discussions.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">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.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Regards </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">--</div><div dir="auto">Arnaud </div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le dim. 13 déc. 2020 à 13:50, Sunday Folayan <<a href="mailto:sfolayan@skannet.com" target="_blank">sfolayan@skannet.com</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Dear Arnaud,</p>
<p>I must have missed some embedded message in the Legal Counsel's
email.</p>
<p>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.<br>
</p>
<p>Thank you.</p>
<p>Sunday.<br>
</p>
<div>On 12/13/20 11:35 AM, Arnaud AMELINA
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">Hello, PDWG members </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">It appears in recent communications from legal
counsel that co-chairs have recommended some draft policies
for approval by board.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">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?</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Where did the resource transfer proposal version
5.0 come from?</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">We seem to have abandoned the PDP and its key
underlining principles.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Regards </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">--</div>
<div dir="auto">Arnaud </div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le mer. 9 déc. 2020 à 16:25,
Ashok <<a href="mailto:ashok@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">ashok@afrinic.net</a>>
a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>Dear
Community members,</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>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.</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>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 <i>'Board's Prerogatives'</i> –
AFPUB-2020-GEN-004-DRAFT02- as well as the policy
entitled <i>'Resource Transfer Policy'</i>
–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.</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>I
hold no mandate to interfere in the work of the PDWG
and/or its independence I shall refrain from doing so.</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>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.</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>My
advice addresses the aforementioned two policy
proposals <span> </span>and my purpose is to ensure
that the work of the PDWG thereon <span> </span>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.
</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>In
regard to the policy entitled <i>'Board's
Prerogatives'</i>, I have taken note of AFRINIC's
Staff Assessment report dated 04 November 2020 - </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Garamond","serif""><a href="https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2020-gen-004-d2#impact" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"><span>https://afrinic.net/policy/<wbr>proposals/2020-gen-004-d2#<wbr>impact</span></a></span></b><b><span>.
</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>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. </span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>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, <span> </span>onto
the Board of Director’s prerogatives, the foundations
of which are grounded in articles 3.4 and 15 of the
AFRINIC’s bylaws. </span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>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.</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>As
regard the policy entitled <i>'Resource Transfer
Policy'</i>, the PDWG may be aware that the said
policy (i.e. version 4 thereof) is presently<s> </s>the
subject of an appeal before the Appeal Committee and
the matter is yet to be determined. </span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>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 <i>pendente lite</i>.
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. </span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>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. </span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>Ashok.B.Radhakissoon.</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span>Legal
Counsel<br>
</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><b><span> </span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><b><span><br>
<br>
</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Garamond","serif""> </span></b></p>
</div>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>______________________________<wbr>_________________
RPD mailing list
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote><br><br>-- <br>Kind regards, <p>Paschal.<br></p>