<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hello</p>
<p>Keep things simple in this case means not disputing the
interpretation of the legal adviser which is not an option given
the current situation and the multiple concerns that have been
raised.<br>
</p>
<p>By the explanation below "in the absence of the minimum number of
members required" the legal adviser believes there must always be
all members in the committee in order for it to take a decision. I
would like to understand what analogy he/she used from any legal
system to conclude that. While some people may consider that in
the absence of a clear provision the committee may decide by any
number of its members by majority.</p>
<p>In any case I reinforce the request that once a new ToR moves
forward to be approved and published by the Board it is made
available to this PDWG for final comments, in order to all
possible situations can be clarified avoiding any further
confusion in the future. Thanks for sharing the Board meeting
minutes. 202006.13 in that case mentions a public consultation for
a new ToR for a month but that doesn't necessarily mean the
candidate version may be shared with PDWG *<b>prior</b>* to its
approval and publishing by the Board.<br>
</p>
<p>Regards<br>
Fernando<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 22/03/2021 07:30, S. Moonesamy
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:6.2.5.6.2.20210321213117.0af34348@elandnews.com">Dear Mr
Frediani,
<br>
<br>
You raised a concern about your questions going unanswered. There
was the following paragraph in the email at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/012745.html">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/012745.html</a>
<br>
<br>
The Board of Directors acted promptly and was legally advised
that,
<br>
in the absence of an expressed provision to that effect (i.e.
quorum)
<br>
in the Appeal Committee's ToR, all five (5) members of the
Appeal
<br>
Committee, including any designated chairperson thereof,
constitute a
<br>
quorum for the purposes of the Appeal Committee.
<br>
<br>
The composition of the Appeal Committee is specified in Section 2
of the Terms of Reference. The terms of reference do not specific
the minimum number of members required for the Committee to hear
an appeal. The total number of members is the requirement given
the absence of a clause about the minimum number of members.
<br>
<br>
Section 2.3 is about conflict of interest. In my opinion, it is
not applicable in this case as the resignation of the two
committee members is not related to conflict of interest.
<br>
<br>
As I see it, and I could be wrong, it is better to keep matters
simple instead of getting into a debate with a lawyer on his/her
legal opinion [1].
<br>
<br>
Please see Action Item 202006.13 [2] as it is related to your
comment about the possible revision of the terms of reference.
<br>
<br>
Regards,
<br>
S. Moonesamy
<br>
<br>
1. A written objective interpretation or analysis of a legal
position by a professional legal practitioner which is intended to
be relied on by the person to whom it is addressed.
<br>
2.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.afrinic.net/ast/pdf/2021-miinutes/20210120-minutes.pdf">https://www.afrinic.net/ast/pdf/2021-miinutes/20210120-minutes.pdf</a>
<br>
<br>
Board Chair, AFRINIC <br>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
RPD mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>