[AFRI-Discuss] Finalizing Individual Membership Recommendation

peters omoragbon petersomoragbon at gmail.com
Tue Jul 18 12:45:41 UTC 2017

Thank you Alan
Your explanations have thrown more light to enrich the debates.
Well appreciated.Best

On Monday, July 17, 2017, 5:18:45 PM GMT+1, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

Dear Pastor Peters, 

You addressed your questions to Aziz, but a few of them really are in mydomain and I will attempt to reply.

The message I sent Aziz was a reminder and not the result of a recentALAC action. In 2008/9, we had the first Independent Review of At-Large.This process was a long and complicated one that involved extensiveconsultation all all levels of the community. One of the recommendationswas that all RALOs investigate how (note "how", not"if") to incorporate individual unaffiliated members into theirorganization. That set of recommendations was approved by the ICANN Boardon 26 June 2009 (Resolution 2009-06-26-30). 

At that time, NARALO already had individual members, but it was the onlyRALO that did. The "Recommendation", once approved by theBoard, was no longer an option (and notably, no RALO objected to it!)EURALO and eventually APRALO developed procedures, each in their own way,to accommodate users unaffiliated with ALSes. AFRALO and LACRALO have notdone so to date.

The ongoing review of At-Large has come out with an even strongerrecommendation that individual users are essential, and that it MUST notbe required that a person interested in joining At-Large either form orfind an ALS. Although At-Large is generally not agreeing with the detailsof this recommendation and particularly the implication that ALSes beeffectively abolished, all of our responses, including those of the RALOswhich all RALO members had a opportunity to contribute to, agreed that wewould have individual unaffiliated members in all regions. This"compromise" has the advantage of allowing RALOs to set thespecific rules (within a reasonable envelope) of such individualmembership.

To address your number 2, the ALAC does not have direct jurisdiction overRALOs, but RALOS are subject to certain rules made by the ALAC (anddeveloped with regional input) where the ICANN Bylaws and ALAC Rules ofProcedure give the ALAC such rights. Each RALO selects ALAC Members andby doing so, the region gives those representatives the right to act ontheir behalf.

Regarding your question 5 on the benefits of individual members, theICANN Bylaws identifies At-Large as the home of all individual Internetusers. As originally envisioned, there would be ALSes which would allow(and I quote the Bylaws) "every individual Internet user who is acitizen of a country within the RALO's Geographic Region to participatein at least one of the RALO's At-Large Structures". Clearly this isnot the case now, and it is unrealistic to believe that this is possible.Many ALSes have particular orientations or interests (such as yours) andcannot be expected to accommodate everyone. And two sets of externalreviewers have recognized that requiring someone to set up a new ALS justto be able to participate in a RALO is not reasonable.

At-Large had FAR TOO FEW PEOPLE who are really active in the policy workfor which ICANN exists. At-Large is not here to do outreach or organizeand participate in RALOs. These are necessary activities to allow us tothrive, but the REAL reason we are here is to work with other parts ofICANN representing user interests. Anything we can do to remove barriersto allowing more participation is crucial to our existence.


At 16/07/2017 04:37 PM, Peters Omoragbon wrote:

Dear Mr. Aziz

Thank you for your information and once again I apologise for myunavoidable absence during the last call.

On the issue in reference I oppose to any vote to be taken via electronicmeans save for at a General Assembly  on the following grounds 
1. Please provide the transcript or link to the transcript of the ALACMeeting where the decision passed to you by the ALAC Chair wastsken.
2. Ralos from icann set rules are to set their own guidelines which doesnot conflict with icann rules of procedure for effective coordination oftheir (RALOS) activities. If one is to decipher your information itpresupposes that ALAC is giving Ralos an ultimatum to take a decision onissue(s) that is yet to receive consensus of the GA
3. No decision was taken on any item at the GA once the GA resolved thatALL items be referred back to the ROP WORKGROUP and represented to theGA. So even though you are the chair of AFRALO you cannot over rulr thehighest decision making body of AFRALO -the GA.
4. ROP WORKGROUP meeting is yet to be called and that is what should bedone asap.
5. Of what emergent benefit is individual membership that it shouldoverride other pressing issues confronting AFRALO to warrant this presentpressure?
Your call for a vote is procedurally defective and undemocratic.  Itis an attempt to rush Afralo to make decision through the back door forthe benefit of vested interests and individuals. 

We oppose this motion.

Thank you. 
Pastor Peters Omoragbon 

On 16 Jul 2017 21:07, "Aziz Hilali via AFRI-Discuss"<afri-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:
      - <English>   

      - Dear Members,   

      - As per the information shared during our monthly call, It is beenbrought to our attention by the ALAC Chair that as per the first ALACreview requirements and the current At-Large Review (on-going)recommendations, the RALOs are tasked with ensuring individualmembership. Therefore we need to get this particular item completedwith.   

      - As you may recall during the General Assembly in Johannesburg, thisparticular recommendation of the working group gained traction but wecould not formerly record it due to other recommendations and timeconstraints. In view of this, I suggest we separate this recommendationon individual membership which already gained traction and pass that nowto comply with At-Large reviews requirements.   

      - For reference, below is the link to the latest version of the"Individual Membership » recommendation distributed inJohannesburg:   

      - https://community.icann.org/display/AFRALO/Individual+Membership+-+AFRALO+ROP+Review   

      - Item 7 of the recommendation currently reads as follows:   

      - The individual membership issue will bereviewed in 2019 to reconsider their rights and duties of unaffiliatedmembers in light of the 2018 experience.    

      - I propose to modify it in this way:   

      - "The individual membership issue will be reviewed by or before 2years after implementation to reconsider the rights and duties ofunaffiliated members in light of experience gained during initialtrial"   

      - I hereby, as AFRALO Chair, call for any objection to approving theconditions under which individual membership will be implemented aspresented in the above recommendation.   

      - Kindly provide your response within 72hrs   

      - Best regards   

      - Aziz HILALI   

      - AFRALO Chair   

      - ---------------------------   

      - <French>   

      - Chers membres,   

      - D'après les informations partagées lors de notre téléconférencemensuelle, le président de l’ALAC a attiré notre attention sur lefait que les RALO sont appelés à accepter les adhésionsindividuelles, et ce suivant les exigences de la première revue del’ALAC et les recommandations de la revue actuelle d’At-Large, Parconséquent, nous devons finir ce point particulier sans plustarder.   

      - Comme vous le savez, lors de l’assemblée Générale àJohannesburg, cette recommandation du groupe de travail a étéapprouvée, mais nous n’avions pas pu l’officialiser à cause dufait que toutes les recommandations étaient dans un même document etque le temps ne nous a pas permis de les finir toutes. Pour cela, jesuggère que nous séparons cette recommandation sur l’adhésionindividuelle pour se conformer avec les exigence des revuesd’At-Large.   

      - Pour référence, voici le lien de la toute dernière versiondistribuée à Johannesburg de la recommandation relative àl’adhésion individuelle:   

      - https://community.icann.org/display/AFRALO/Individual+Membership+-+AFRALO+ROP+Review   

      - Le point 7 de la recommandation dit:   

      - La question des droits et devoirs desmembres individuels sera réexaminée en 2019 au vue de l’expériencede 2018.   

      - Je propose de le modifier pour devenir:   

      - «La question des droits et devoirs des membres individuels seraréexaminée 2 ans après la mise en oeuvre (ou avant) au vue del’expérience de la période d’essai».   

      - En ma qualité de Président d’AFRALO, je demande s’il y a desobjections pour l’approbation des conditions sous lesquellesl’adhésion individuelle sera appliquée comme présenté dans larecommandation mentionnée.    

      - Prière répondre dans les 72 heures.   

      - Cordialement   

      - Aziz Hilali   

      - AFRALO Chair   

      - _______________________________________________   

      - AFRI-Discuss mailing list   

      - AFRI-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org   

      - https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/afri-discuss   

      - Homepage for the region:http://www.afralo.org   

      - Posting guidelines to ensure machine translations of emails sent tothis list are more accurate:http://www.funredes.org/mistica/english/emec/method_emec/presentation.html#anexo1   

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

AFRI-Discuss mailing list
AFRI-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org

Homepage for the region:http://www.afralo.org

Posting guidelines to ensure machine translations of emails sent to thislist are more accurate:http://www.funredes.org/mistica/english/emec/method_emec/presentation.html#anexo1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/afri-discuss/attachments/20170718/5e99c8fe/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the AFRI-Discuss mailing list