<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi Jordi,<div class=""><br class=""><div style="line-height: 1.38; text-align: justify; margin-top: 0pt; margin-bottom: 0pt;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-position: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;" class="">The response to your inquiry on July 25th was delayed for known circumstances beyond my control and I would like to apologise for such delay. I would also like to thank you for your time on 8 October 2021 during which we discussed the situation.</span></div><br class=""><div style="line-height: 1.38; text-align: justify; margin-top: 0pt; margin-bottom: 0pt;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-position: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;" class="">It is true that this current situation could have been avoided with more proactiveness from AFRINIC and we commit to speak up early enough next time we face a similar situation.</span></div><br class=""><div style="line-height: 1.38; text-align: justify; margin-top: 0pt; margin-bottom: 0pt;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-position: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;" class="">I got the sentiment that there might have been a misunderstanding in regard to the intent of the proposal ‘Board prerogatives on the PDP’ that you authored and the legal impact assessment. I therefore propose that you have a meeting with the AFRINIC legal team facilitated by the Policy Liaison Team to hash out the issue to ensure the next submission flows better. </span></div><div style="line-height: 1.38; text-align: justify; margin-top: 0pt; margin-bottom: 0pt;" class=""><br class=""></div></div><div style="text-align: start; line-height: 1.38; margin-top: 0pt; margin-bottom: 0pt;" class="">Thanks and Regards,</div><div class=""><div class="">
<meta charset="UTF-8" class=""><div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div><div class="">--</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Eddy Kayihura M.</div><div class="">Chief Executive Officer</div><div class="">African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) Ltd.</div><div class="">====</div><div class="">t: +230 403 51 00 | tt: @afrinic | <a href="https://www.afrinic.net" class="">https://www.afrinic.net</a> | <a href="http://youtube.com/afrinicmedia" class="">youtube.com/afrinicmedia</a></div><div class="">___________________________</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Vision: “A secure and accessible Internet for sustainable digital growth in Africa”</div><div class="">Mission: “To serve the African Internet community by delivering efficient services in a global multi-stakeholder environment”</div><div class="">Values: EPIC (■ Excellence ■ Passion ■ Integrity ■ Community Driven)</div></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">*******************************************************************************************************************<br class="">This email and any attachment (s) transmitted with it are confidential. They may also be privileged or otherwise protected by law. They are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email by error please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. You are also notified that disclosing, copying, distributing, or taking any action in relation to its contents is strictly prohibited and unlawful. By reading the message and opening any attachment, the recipient accepts full responsibility for taking protective and remedial action about viruses and other defects.<br class=""><br class="">*******************************************************************************************************************</div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">Hi Eddy, all,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">I’ve some observations and inputs. I expect detailed responses to each of those points.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><ol style="margin-top:0cm" type="1" start="1" class=""><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">AFRINIC
published an updated version of the IA with the legal aspects much
later than the consensus was reached. When the staff or the Board
believe that there is any trouble with a policy proposal, the right
thing to do, and what the community expects is that *<b class="">ASAP</b>*, during the discussion, it is clearly stated. This is something happening *<b class="">very frequently</b>*,
it is like if you don't pay attention to part of your obligations until
the last minute, which means that you’re “de facto” blocking the
process.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">It is the duty of the staff (including the legal counsel) and even the Board, in case of issues with any proposal, provide *<b class="">specific</b>*
inputs or suggestions to address them on time, instead of waiting for
the full process and then bringing back the policy to the list.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">Despite that, I’ve provided a clear explanation *<b class="">long time ago</b>* about why there is no such conflict as depicted by the IA.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><ol style="margin-top:0cm" type="1" start="1" class=""><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">Where
the PDP say that there must be a ToR created by the Board? Note that
such ToR doesn’t exists in other RIRs, so clearly there is no need for
that. The PDP *<b class="">only</b>* empowers the board to appoint the AC “the
person may file an appeal with an Appeal Committee appointed by the
AFRINIC Board of Directors”.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">If
the Board believes that a ToR is required, clearly it can suggest one
to the community and bring it as a policy proposal. This can be done in
several ways: the Board itself, one or several members of the Board, or
if more neutrality is wished, asking the community to develop such a
policy proposal.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">What
is is clear is that in NO CASE, the ToR can present a modification of
the PDP without a policy proposal reaching consensus. Note for example
that the ToR were doing so in many points. If you want, I can depict
them in a different threat. That was clearly an illegal action of the
Board against the PDP, because the PDP is “our law” and the Board is not
empowered to modify it beyond what is stated in the bylaws.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li></ol><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">It
looks like the staff preparing the IA and the Board, have not
completely read the policy proposal, because the policy proposal is NOT
about the ToR, but it is using the ToR as an example of the problem. The
proposal says clearly “Basically, the problem can be summarised as that
the board and/or the committees do not have the right to behave against
the PDP, even if it is only in a matter of interpretation, and
consequently, they can only change the PDP thru the PDP itself, with an
exceptional provision set by the AFRINIC bylaws:” and “It should be
clarified that the examples on the previous section, are a concrete
situation, but this proposal tries to avoid this problem being repeated
in the future, by ensuring that the Board and Committees prerogatives
are well delimited.”<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">Considering that, it is absolutely ridiculous to have in the IA this observation “</span><span lang="EN-US" class="">Instead,
and while the author seems to have no issue whatsoever with the
existing provisions of Section 3.5, he is proposing to add new sections
i.e. 3.6 and 3.6.1 that relate to the prerogatives of the Board of
Directors. </span><b class=""><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">In
light of the above, therefore, it may reasonably be viewed that the
proposed policy is akin to an encroachment on the powers of the Board of
Directors.</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class="">” Which by the way is untrue because the Board powers over the PDP are *<b class="">only</b>*
those that are attributed by the community. Remember that the community
is on top of the membership and the Board is only a representation of
the membership in Afrinic as an organization, but in NO WAY, the
membership can *<b class="">alter the PDP/CPM</b>*, unless it is done by means of the PDP itself.</span><span lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" class="">Where
in the PDP or the bylaws, there is an authorization for the Board to
not-ratify a proposal and return it to the list? Note that other RIRs
have explicit text about that, but this is not the case in AFRINIC.
Also, in RIPE, the Board doesn’t ratify the policies. Maybe we want to
change that and once a policy reach consensus, should just be
implemented? Again, remember that the resources are from the community,
not AFRINIC, not any RIR, the power offered to the Board is provided by
the community. It is wrong that the bylaws take the responsibility on
that. It is a clear violation of the community soberanity. In fact this
proposal is *<b class="">resolving that</b>*, so the proposal is playing in the
side of the Board to correct something that has been wrong for a long
time: “In exceptional situations, duly justified, the Board may define
temporary procedures or policy changes, which will only be valid maximum
until the next PPM, as they must be immediately introduced as a draft
policy proposal. Attending to the exceptionality, the “Varying the
Process” section will be used in order to try to speed up the
consensus.”<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" class="">Note that the bylaws (11.4) *<b class="">only</b>* allow the Board to “<i class="">adopt
such policies regarding the management of internet number resources
where it considers that the same is necessary and urgent, having regard
to the proper and responsible usage of these resources.</i>”. Can you
please point me how a modification of the PDP (as the ToR), is a
necessary and urgent matter regarding the usar of the resources? So, the
bylaws only allow the Board to, for example, put in place an urgent
policy for transfers and then subject it to the endorsement of the
community.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" class="">Also,
the bylaws 11.5 clearly indicate that such urgently adopted policy by
the Board shall be submitted to the community endorsement. Remember that
the PDP has a very clear process for such endorsement (Draft Policy
Proposal reaching consensus and passing the last call). Can you please
let me know when the ToR were approved by following the PDP to obtain
such community endorsement? Note again that I’m using the ToR as an
example, it is clearly not the goal of this proposal *<b class="">at all</b>*. We can find other examples if you want, but this one is very convenient because the Board *<b class="">again</b>* has violated the bylaws and the PDP by not following what is stated in 11.4 and 11.5.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li></ol><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" class="">Note
that the flow that it is expected if this proposal is ratified will be
resolving all the problems, so again, playing in your side *<b class="">not against</b>*:<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><ol style="margin-top:0cm" type="1" start="1" class=""><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" class="">You ratify the policy.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" class="">It doesn’t require any “implementation time”.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" class="">The
policy is empowering then the Board to, if needed, define a new ToR, I
expect that in consultancy with the community, but in case of extreme
emergency, you can just do whatever you believe is the best and then the
ToR are “in place”. Note that bylaws 11.4 *<b class="">doesn't allow you to do so</b>*
(because it is not about resources), but the community is, by means of
this policy, enhancing your prerogatives. So, you aren’t anymore
violating the PDP. If your legal counsel is telling you that it should
be “improved in the bylaws”, then it is up to you as well, but I don’t
think is needed, because the community is giving you the mandate.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" class="">However,
now you, need to submit that as a policy proposal (the Board or ask
someone from the community, etc.), and that will provide you the
endorsement as required by 11.5 of the bylaws.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li><li class="m_7801872336324481040MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" class="">So
yes, the “temporary provisions” in the previous version of the proposal
was good to have, but the community didn’t like it, however, as you can
see in this work-flow, you don’t need it, because you can at the same
time as the ratification make a temporary provision yourself: *<b class="">THE PROPOSAL IS GIVING YOU AN EXPLICIT AUTHORIZATION FOR THAT, WHICH YOU DON’T HAVE RIGHT NOW ACCORDING TO THE BYLAWS</b>*. That’s why I accepted the suggestion of the co-chairs to remove it, because it was not any issue.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></li></ol><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><div class=""><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">As
more as I read the IA, more I see that someone (staff, Board), was
missing all this. I don’t think it was my fault to write down that flow,
because I did in the meeting and thru many emails.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">If you don’t agree with this rationale, can you please explain *<b class="">exactly what is wrong</b>* ?<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">Further
to that, in the email from the legal counsel that you cited, he
mentions article 3.4 and 15 of the bylaws, which I’ve read again many
times before writing this. Can you explain what is the relation of this
proposal with that in the sense that the legal counsel believes it is an
encroachment? As I just explained, is in the other way around, is
ensuring that the text of the bylaws is enhanced by the explicit support
of the community by the PDP.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">Also
the legal counsel seems to be mixing community (the responsible of the
PDP/CPM) and membership, because is suggesting to modify the bylaws by
the membership instead of the community … No, wrong. You don’t need to
change the bylaws. It will be nice, probably, but the community doesn’t
care. Remember, again, that the responsibility of the PDP/CPM is from
the community. NEVER MIND what the bylaws say about that, the community
don’t care. You can have a broken bylaws, but you can’t empower yourself
*<b class="">ignoring</b>* the community, to take over the PDP and alter it in any way.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">And finally, fortunatelly the legal counsel is clear that his legal advise is non-binging.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">If
you believe that the Board can take over the PDP/CPM and community
responsabilities, when they have not been authorized by the PDP, because
the bylaws say that, you are saying that AFRINIC can take over the
community, which is plain wrong, and then we will need to scalate to
ICANN and even courts. I will much prefer we don’t go that way.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">I
think it is evident that I’ve been untiringly trusting and helping as
much as I could all the RIRs and overall Internet community since day
one, but recent events such this one, look like filling the last drop of
water in the already full glass, as I already said a few days ago.
Please probe me that I’m wrong and the community can still work together
with AFRINIC, instead of looking for our own alternative way. What I’m
not going to do is to go against my personal principles, because before
any organization (AFRINIC in this case), for me, the *<b class="">community</b>*
is first. I will hate to turn all my efforts againt any RIR that is not
respecting the community, but no doubt I will do if it is the case and I
can work very very very hard in the direction of what I believe is the
right thing to do for the community, believe me.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">I
sincerely hope to heard soon about all those points, and the Board to
reconsider his position and the ratification of this policy so we can
resolve this matter extremely urgently. It is extremly timely
considering that the community is not approving your new ToR, so we
don’t need to create a new “AC impass” if we can all work together,
instead of having a Board that keeps being disrespecful with the
community.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">Regards,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class=""><span class="il">Jordi</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size: 12pt;" lang="EN-US" class="">@jordipalet</span></p></div>
</div>
</div></body></html>