Details
|
ID: |
AFPUB-2020-GEN-002-DRAFT04 |
Date Submitted: |
10 Nov 2021 |
|
Author: |
|
Version: |
4.0 |
|
Obsoletes: |
NA |
Amends: |
|
|
PDP Milestone Summary
|
|||
Proposal
1. Summary of the problem being addressed by this proposal
The current PDP uses a working group for policy development activities. It does not define specific procedures and operational rules for the working group.
This has over time led to interpretation issues in regards to how the working group is administered and how discussions are moderated.
2. Summary of how this proposal addresses the problem
The proposal addresses the problems by defining clear and explicit Working Group guidelines and procedures.
3. Proposal
The proposal amends the Policy Development Process, section 3.3 ( obsoletes Paragraphs 2 and 3) and obsoletes section 3.5.3 of the AFRINIC CPM.
| Current | Proposal |
|---|---|
|
3.3 The Policy Development Working Group (PDWG) The Policy Development Working Group (PDWG) discusses the proposals. Anyone may participate via the Internet or in person. PDWG work is carried out through the Resource Policy Discussion mailing list (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.) and the bi-annual AFRINIC Public Policy Meetings (PPM). Any person, participating either in person or remotely, is considered to be part of the Policy Development Working Group. The Policy Development Working Group has two Chairs to perform its administrative functions. The PDWG Chairs are chosen by the AFRINIC community during the Public Policy Meeting and serve staggered two-year terms. The term ends during the first Public Policy Meeting corresponding to the end of the term for which they were appointed. A term may begin or end no sooner than the first day of the Public Policy Meeting and no later than the last day of the Public Policy Meeting as determined by the mutual agreement of the current Chair and the new Chair. If the Working Group Chair is unable to serve his or her full term, the Working Group may select a replacement to serve the remainder of the term. If the Working Group Chairs are unable to attend the Public Policy Meeting, the Working Group shall nominate a Chair for the session. Anyone present at the meeting, whether in person or by remote participation, may participate in the selection process for a temporary Chair. |
3.3 Introduction The Policy Development working group (PDWG) provides an open public forum to discuss Internet number resources policies and related topics of interest to AFRINIC and the Internet community in the AFRINIC service region. PDWG sessions are held at AFRINIC Public policy meetings. Between meetings, discussions continue through the Resource Policy discussions mailing list. The PDWG is open to all interested individuals. This document serves as guidelines on how the working group shall operate. It defines clear roles and responsibilities for the PDWG co-chairs and clear procedures for the working group’s administration.
3.3.1 Co-chairs Two PDWG co-chairs primarily administer the Policy Development working group. The PDWG co-chairs perform a vital role in managing the working group. The effectiveness of the PDWG is dependent on the active participation of the co-chairs. PDWG co-chairs undertake their roles on a volunteer basis. The co-chairs coordinate the activities of the policy development’s working group and are expected to attend all AFRINIC Public Policy Meetings. They must remain subscribed to the AFRINIC Policy Discussion mailing list for the duration of their term and must also be subscribed to the AFRINIC members-discuss mailing list during their term. For each policy proposal, one co-chair must be assigned as the primary contact; both co-chairs however shall actively participate in the consensus-building. The leading co-chair for the proposal as described above shall guide the policy proposal through the different phases of the PDP.
3.3.2 Responsibilities of PDWG co-chairs The co-chairs’ responsibility encompasses at least the following:
The co-chairs have the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that the working group achieves forward progress. The co-chairs are also responsible to ensure that the working group operates in an open and fair manner.
The co-chairs should attempt to ensure that the discussions on the list are relevant and that they converge to consensus agreements. The co-chairs should make sure that discussions on the list are summarized and that the outcome is well documented to avoid repetition and other abuses.
The responsibilities of the co-chairs are listed below: 3.3.2.1 Before an AFRINIC Public Policy Meeting a) Assist authors with formatting proposals 3.3.2.2. During a Public Policy Meeting a) Chair the Public Policy meeting and moderate the discussions. 3.3.2.3. After a Public Policy Meeting a) Send a report of the Public Policy Meeting to the community and policy discussion mailing lists including policy proposal discussion outcomes and open action items.
3.3.3. Appointment of PDWG Co-chairs The working group appoints two co-chairs for a two-year term. Co-chairs’ appointments occur in alternate years for each seat (seat1and seat2). The working group makes decisions by consensus and shall also appoint co-chairs by consensus. Elections should be used as a last resort solution. The appointment for each seat follows the following process: At least 60 days before the Public Policy Meeting, AFRINIC staff send a call for nominations to the policy development mailing list. The call will contain:
Any natural person residing in a country from the AFRINIC service region is allowed to volunteer. Volunteers make themselves known by introducing themselves (short biography and motivation) as a candidate on the working group mailing list. Candidates for the co-chair’s position should be known as active participants on the working group mailing list with good experience with the AFRINIC policy development process and must have attended at least two (2) AFRINIC Public Policy Meetings of which one must be in person, during the last 3 years. If at least one nomination is received by the closing date, the appointment process starts. The appointment must be held at the upcoming Public Policy Meeting as the first item on the agenda. Those present at the session, either in person or remotely, will determine by consensus among the candidates who shall take the available position. The remaining chair will determine whether consensus has been reached. If the working group finds itself without a co-chair, AFRINIC CEO will lead If only one candidate is being evaluated, the lack of consensus must declare the seat vacant. The board of directors shall appoint an interim co-chair within two weeks after the PPM. The Interim co-chair will act up to the appointment of the new co-chair. If no consensus can be reached and more than one candidate is being evaluated, then an online secret ballot to appoint the new co-chair will be held within two weeks after the PPM. The secret ballot shall be opened to past PDPWG co-chairs, past board of directors chairs and past CEOs who completed at least one term and have not been recalled. Those who served in multiple positions shall have one vote. Votes and counting shall be conducted using a ranked preferential voting method otherwise known as IRV. The winner of the secret ballot will become the new co-chair. In the unlikely event that after all the rounds of counting of the vote, there is a tie between the two (2) most ranked candidates, they shall be asked to select one among them to serve the term by consensus. The seat shall be declared vacant in case of failure of agreement between the last two. If the secret ballot cannot be held, the seat is declared vacant. The board of directors shall appoint interim co-chairs(s). The Interim co-chair(s) will act up to the appointment of the new co-chair(s). The exit of the co-chair includes a handover period and an expectation that the sitting chair follows proposals, which have already reached consensus, to the completion of their PDP cycle.
3.3.4. Recalling a co-chair If the co-chair does not attend two consecutive AFRINIC Public Policy Meetings without reasons or have been publicly reported by the other co-chair as no longer attending to the working group’s affairs without reasons, the co-chair will be removed from its role. Anyone may request the recall of a working group co-chair at any time, upon a written request with justifications to the AFRINIC Board of Directors. The request must be supported by at least ten (10) other persons from ten(10) different organisations. These persons must have been subscribed to the working group mailing list for at least one (01) year and attended at least one (1) AFRINIC Public Policy Meeting during the last two (2) years, either in-person or remotely A request for recall shall be published on the Working Group mailing list Anytime there is a request for co-chair recall, the board shall form a recall committee composed of one (01) CoE member appointed by the CoE, one (01) Governance Committee (GC) member appointed by the GC, and one (01) community member appointed by the Board of Directors. The co-chair(s) must be recalled if proven unable to perform the role of co-chair, or preventing the WG from making forward progress deliberately, or showing constant and persistent violations of the PDP or the WG's rules. The recall committee report shall be published on the working group mailing list. The recall committee decision shall be final and binding. Whenever a co-chair is removed from its role and recalled, the remaining co-chair will assume the chairing role of the working group until the appointment of a new co-chair(s). If both co-chairs are recalled, AFRINIC CEO shall as a matter of urgency lead the appointment by the working group of an interim co-chair(s) via the mailing list or at the Public Policy meeting. If no consensus can be reached, the Board of directors shall appoint interim co-chairs(s) for the working group within two weeks after the ascertainment of the lack of consensus
3.3.5. Resignation of co-chair If a co-chair resigns, the remaining co-chair will assume the chairing role of the working group until the appointment of a new co-chair(s). If both co-chairs resign, AFRINIC CEO shall as a matter of urgency lead the appointment by the working group of an interim co-chair(s) via the mailing list or at the Public Policy meeting. If no consensus can be reached, the Board of directors shall appoint interim Co-chairs(s) for the working group. The Interim chair will act up to the appointment of the new co-chair(s).
3.3.6 Operations working group (PDWG) 3.3.6.1 Moderation of working group discussions and sessions The challenge of managing the policy development working group sessions is to balance the need for open and fair consideration of the issues against the need to make forward progress. The working group, as a whole, has the final responsibility for striking this balance. The working group co-chairs have the responsibility for overseeing the process. To facilitate making forward progress, the working group co-chairs may wish to decide to reject or defer the input from an individual, based upon the following criteria:
3.3.7 Individual Behaviors Occasionally one or more individuals may engage in behaviour on a mailing list that, in the opinion of the working group co-chairs, is disruptive to the working group’s progress or goes against applicable Codes of Conduct. Unless the disruptive behaviour is severe enough that it must be stopped immediately, the co-chairs should attempt to discourage the disruptive behaviour by communicating directly with the offending individual. If the behaviour persists, the co-chairs should send at least one public warning on the mailing list. The warning should clearly expose what is being cautioned on the individual and the basis of co-chairs judgment. As last resort, and typically after one or more explicit warnings, and if the behaviour persists, the working group co-chairs may suspend the mailing list posting privileges of the disruptive individual for a period of not more than 30 days. The application of this restriction must be gradual. If the individual resumes with the same behaviour or worse, the restriction period may increase. Even while posting privileges are suspended, the individual must not be prevented from receiving messages posted to the list. Other Mailing list control solutions may be considered. The working group must have adopted these solutions. Like all other working group’s co-chairs' decisions, any suspension of posting privileges is subject to appeal.
3.3.8 Public Policy Meeting A Public Policy Meeting (PPM) is a meeting open to the community wherein proposals for policies are discussed within the framework of the Policy Development Process (PDP). The AFRINIC Board of Directors calls PPMs in accordance with section 11.2 of the Bylaws. If one co-chair can’t participate in a Public Policy Meeting, the second co-chair shall chair the meeting. If both co-chairs can’t participate in a meeting, the working group shall appoint one (1) person temporarily to lead the session. If the The temporary chair appointed above shall lead the discussions according to the agenda, but can’t determine consensus on policy proposals. He will provide meeting minutes to the mailing list and allow the co-chairs to take over. While open discussion and contribution are essential to working group success, co-chairs are responsible for ensuring forward progress. When acceptable to the working group, co-chairs may call for restricted participation (but not restricted attendance!) at Public Policy meetings for the purpose of achieving progress. The working group co-chairs then have the responsibility to refuse to grant the floor to any individual who is unprepared or otherwise covering inappropriate
3.3.9 Consensus The working group makes decisions by consensus as defined in the PDP
3.3.10 Appeals 3.3.10.1 Suspension of posting privileges Anyone whose privileges of posting to the mailing list have been suspended by the working group co-chairs may file an appeal against the decision to the AFRINIC CEO. The CEO chair will evaluate the circumstances, hear the co-chairs and complainers and decide. The CEO may direct that the Co-chairs decision be annulled if disproportioned or unjustified considering the severity of the behaviour. The CEO’s decision shall be final and binding. 3.3.10.2 Co-chairs appointment A person who disagrees with the actions taken by a co-chair regarding the appointment process shall follow the conflict resolution process as defined in the PDP. Actions are taken by the board of directors regarding the appointment process is final and binding |
4. Acknowledgement
The author would like to acknowledge that some text and procedures in this document have been adapted from RFC2418 and from the working group’s practices of other RIRs.
Revision History
Revision History
| Date | Details |
| 10 Nov 2021 |
Version 4: AFPUB-2020-GEN-001-DRAFT04
|
| 22 May 2021 |
Version 3: AFPUB-2020-GEN-001-DRAFT03 - Make board appoint interim co-chair(s) instead of board chair |
| 30 July 2020 |
Version 2: AFPUB-2020-GEN-001-DRAFT02
|
|
22 July 2020 |
Version 1: AFPUB-2020-GEN-001-DRAFT01 Initial draft posted to rpd formatted |
AFRINIC Policy Impact Assessment
AFRINIC Staff Assessment
15 November 2021
1) Staff Interpretation & Understanding of the proposal
This policy proposal brings in some changes to the functioning of the Policy Development Working Group (PDWG) as follows:-
- PDWG Co-chairs responsibilities
- Appointment of PDWG co-chairs
- Clarifies what needs to happen if one or both co-chairs are recalled
- Clarifies how to proceed should a co-chair resign
- Mentions that if the working group finds itself without a co-chair, AFRINIC CEO will lead the consensus process.
- Describes the operations of the PDWG such as the moderation of the PDWG discussions and sessions, individual behaviours in public policy meetings
- Appeals - Someone whose posting privileges have been suspended can appeal against these decisions
- The Board appoints interim co-chairs within a prescribed timeline
- Clarifies on those eligible to be in the voting register, should the last resort online secret ballot be used to select the PDWG Chair(s).
- In the case of recall of PDWG Chair(s), the proposal mentions the recall needs to be supported by at least 10 other persons from 10 different organisations and that these persons must have been subscribed to the working group mailing list for at least one(01) year and attended at least one (1) AFRINIC Public Policy Meeting during the last two (2) years, either in-person or remotely.
- The proposal also mentions the criteria that the AFRINIC Board shall use to appoint the members of the Recall Committee, as well as guidelines for the consideration of a recall and a 4-week timeline for the recall committee to have done its work.
- Active participation of candidates for the PDWG Chairs position will be determined by the PDWG when assessing the candidate.
2) AFRINIC Staff Clarification Requests
None
3) Staff Comments On Areas of Impact
Impact on Registry Functions
None
Meeting Platforms
Restriction of participation to be also implemented via the AFRINIC meeting platform for online/hybrid events.
Online voting Platform
An online voting platform will be required to host the online secret ballot.
The voting register is defined in the proposal and consists of past PDP WG co-chairs, past board of directors chairs, and past CEOs who completed at least one term and have not been recalled. The list of names is available and accessible to the online voting platform will be subject to identity verification.
Mailing Lists
PDWG Chairs will be subscribed to members-discuss mailing lists as observers.
Legal Assessment
(a) The first paragraph of the proposed policy reads as follows – “The Policy Development working group (PDWG) provides an open public forum to discuss Internet number resources policies and related topics of interest to AFRINIC and the Internet community in the AFRINIC service region”.
At the outset, it should be recalled that the PDP is an emanation of section 11.3 of the AFRINIC bylaws which provides that:
“For the purpose of subsection 11.2 a Public Policy Meeting means a meeting open to the community wherein proposals for policies for a proper and responsible usage and Management of Internet number resources are discussed and agreed within the framework of the Policy Development Process (PDP) defined by the Regional Internet community and ratified by the Board.”
As such, the policy as styled is vague inasmuch as the mandate of the PDWG is limited to propositions and discussions of policies pertaining to IP number resources management. Any other discussion, albeit related to AFRINIC is thus inadmissible.
(b) Under paragraph 3.3.3 of the proposed policy (5th paragraph), reference is made to – “Any natural person residing in a country from the AFRINIC service region is allowed to volunteer”.
It is relevant to recall that section 11.3 of the bylaws provides as follows:
“For the purpose of subsection 11.2 a Public Policy Meeting means a meeting open to the community wherein proposals for policies for a proper and responsible usage and Management of Internet number resources are discussed and agreed within the framework of the Policy Development Process (PDP) defined by the Regional Internet community and ratified by the Board.”
However, it is also acknowledged that notwithstanding the provisions of section 11.3 of the bylaws, i.e. for AFRINIC to have a Regional Internet community, it is an acceptable practice at AFRINIC to allow persons not necessarily residing with the AFRINIC service region to subscribe and participate in its PDWG. Hence, refraining persons not residing in the AFRINIC service region from being appointed as PDWG’s co-chairs would be unfair in these circumstances.
If the intention of the authors is that the PDWG should be owned and controlled by persons residing within the AFRINIC service region, then the mischief should be addressed at the source, thus giving full effect to the provision of section 11.3 of the bylaws so that only person residing within the AFRINIC service region be entitled to subscribe and participate in the PDWG and all others may appear as observers only.
(c) Under paragraph 3.3.3 of the proposed policy (10th paragraph), reference is made to “If no consensus can be reached and more than one candidate is being evaluated, then an online secret ballot to appoint the new co-chair will be held within two weeks after the PPM. The secret ballot shall be opened to past PDPWG co-chairs, past board of directors chairs, and past CEOs who completed at least one term and have not been recalled”
There is no legal rationale that for the purpose of finding consensus, it is the working group that decides but in case of an election, the decision-makers are persons excluding the same working group. There is no logic in having 2 separate pools of decision-makers on the same issue of selecting the PDWG’s co-chairs. The authors are recommended to review this aspect of their proposition.
(d) Under 3.3.10 of the proposed policy, reference is made for an appeal to be heard by the Chief Executive Officer. It is added that section 3.5 of the CPM already provides for an appeal against the decision or action committed by the co-chairs. Hence, the current proposal has the effect of making the CEO sits as an alternate appeal venue to the existing Appeal Committee. It is simply duplicity to the existing structure. Besides, even if there was any legal soundness to that proposal (at least for the sake of argument) but as previously raised in the case of the board chair, it should not be forgotten that the CEO is a member of the board so that imposing any additional responsibility to that function can only be done in consultation with the board of directors.
The above are the fundamental issues that the authors and PDWG need to discuss and resolve.
Financial Assessment
Elections or Voting Platform is outsourced and therefore budget needs to be planned accordingly.
4) Implementation
Timeline - Implementation can happen within the timelines prescribed by the Consolidated Policy Manual.
