Dear Pastor Peters I hope you feel you have had your say on this matter but as an ATLAS traveller and assumed leader within At-Large, I would like us all to now move on and work together in the interests of what we want to achieve for the future of At-Large. If you wish to remain on the ATLAS team please do not raise this issue again. We are all very busy trying to get people to Montreal. I would like to think that this is where we are putting our focus. We have mentioned ICANN's Expected Standards of Behaviour - this is core to our expectations of each other within At-Large. How people speak to and about others is a priority for us. If you feel that you cannot maintain this standard and the Ombudsman is called in the assist, then the ATLAS Leadership Team may have to reconsider your selection. This will be the same for anyone wanting to finally make it to the ATLASIII event in November. Please work hard to make our ATLAS a success. We'd like to keep you on the team. But we want it to be a team of participants who are all working together on the same side. Thank you for your future cooperation in this matter. Maureen On Sat, 6 Jul 2019, 2:29 PM Peters Omoragbon, <petersomoragbon@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Alan and all,
I want to add my 'word' to the sentence being made about Nomcom and its selection process.
First, I am happy that this issue is generating the interest and attention it deserves after I raised the query on the rationale behind another 'body' deciding over an above the final choice of a RALO when it comes to the outcome of the Nomcom election. In fact, the last AFRALO Teleconference under Bashir has directed a group of us do a critique on the current practice as it relates to the ALAC Byelaws on Nomcom. I am grateful that ICANN Staff immediately sent me the relevant link for my reference and hopefully, will soon submit a draft for consideration.
Flowing from Tijani's post, I picked the following: ICANN is a bottom-up decision making organization. ALAC and At-Large must be and remain so as well.
In simple words, leaders are bound to listen and follow the desires and demands of their followers because they were voted by these followers. And not the other way around. Which was why in the past, I have had cause to disagree with the style of leadership of the present ALAC Chair, where issues are being debated and without waiting to hear from every side before making her position known, by addressing every concerns-but rather would be deeply involved in the debate from the scratch which in itself would influence the outcome as most people are wont to 'support' her position (even if they secretly disagree), so as not to be in the bad book of the chair, that to me is hypocrisy.
If ALAC rules allow for 'consultation' with every RALO for their chosen representatives to Nomcom, and that 'consultation' is by the elections conducted by every RALO, to produce their CHOICE, that choice must and should be respected-because the RALO are not answerable to ALAC but their members. That is what a bottom-up decision implies. For a group of 15 ELECTED officials to SIT OVER the decision and choice of a group of MORE than 1 million members -considering you take the 5 RALOs membership together is a misnomer. That is no democracy. That is not moralistic nor logical. That is autocracy.
ALAC members are elected AND NO OTHER "BODY" sits to decide who amongst these 15 wise men and women are experienced or inexperienced! So, who and why was the provision in the Byelaws made for these same 15 to now sit and approve or disapprove the choice of the 5 Ralos?!
And to think that, the same people that put forward their nomcom choice are the same groups and with the same process that put forward the members of the ALAC beats my imagination. The 'provision' being used now by ALAC to refuse or accept an elected member is giving unchecked and undue power to the 15 wise men and women over the entire ICANN stakeholders. That is is not ideal.
To even imagine that the Chair of ALAC has the prerogative to raise the query and others should just follow suit is akin to a dictatorship. Besides the point of the chair raising such query, or even that by the 15 as a whole is unacceptable.
What constitutes EXPERIENCE if I may ask? Experience is gotten from opportunities given to participate over a period and years on practice and its nurtured and developed. Meaning, opportunities MUST BE GIVEN and where this is not given, how do you gain or develop one? I recalled in those days while applying for a visa to the USA for the first time, the young consular officer who interviewed me and rejected my application said " I had no travelling experience' as I have not travelled out of Nigeria in the past! I appealed that decision by asking if I am not given a visa to travel how do I gain that experience? My reason for travelling was not queried, it was legitimate and I have all the other requirements. And I got the visa. The same way I will look at this obnoxious practice that must be reviewed. ANY candidate put forward by ANY RALO that can read and write and have even a tertiary qualification can serve in any capacity within ICAN as long as it is not an appointment but an election. Their job roles and specification are there for them to read and get used to. Besides, ICANN has in place, leadership training programs for all its elected officers. So, what is the big deal about NOMCOM membership?
My position here is not to fight for Abdulkarim but for justice and equity. It could be anyone tomorrow.
*Having said that, I do not think, some of the allegations made by Abdulkarim in his protest letter against the Chair of ALAC should be swept under the carpet. They must be investigated to give ALAC and ICANN its deserved respects and avoid undermining the office of the Chair. The investigation should be two-pronged. To verify if the allegations are true and can be proven or if they are false. Whatever its outcome, anyone found wanting must be sanctioned.*
If the wishes of the RALOs will not be respected by ALAC or ICANN by extension, then, scrap the electoral process into NOMCOM and make it an appointment where anyone wishing to serve will apply and undergo an interview by the staff of ICANN. If not, then, equity demand that whoever has been so elected by any of the RALOs must be allowed to serve his/her term. *The 'carrot' that the RALO concerned produce another candidate to replace the one duly elected is a rape of democratic choice which must not be allowed to stand. ALAC must respect our** choice irrespective of the opposition by a few members of its members and go back to the drawing board to cover the present loopholes that led us to this debacle to avoid a similar error in the future. That is if we do not succeed with the review of the byelaws.*
I am not going to participate in any voting process to elect a replacement on the ground of principle and fair-play. No one can resit an examination that he passes when there was no cheating.
To my AFRALO members jumping to want to reap from the downfall of another member, I say, pause awhile and let us send a statement to ALAC and ICANN to respect their constituent members. If you allow this to fly, then, we have yet to free ourselves from the slavery and colonial mentality and the divide and rule tendencies of our past colonial masters.
Peace without justice is the peace of the graveyard. I may be standing alone here-but posterity will judge everyone with time. My religion teaches me to stand on the part of the truth. America that as home to ICANN is the world's largest democracy today-so show it.
God bless you all.
PS: Let my sister Nduma and brother Nweke not see my position as opposing their candidatures. I only do not support being used by forces bent on creating undue division within Africa.
Yours truly,
*Pastor Peters Osawaru OMORAGBON*
*Permanent UN Representative*
*-Financial Secretary, Central Association of Nigerians in the United Kingdom-CANUK*
*-Executive President/CEO-Nurses Across the Borders-An NGO in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations-ECOSOC*
*-Designated Contact Person-United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change-UNFCCC*
*-International Liaison Officer-Nigerian Nurses Charitable Association-NNCA-UK*
*-Board Member-Conference of NGOS in Special Consultative Status with the United Nations-CONGO*
*-Member Steering Committee Regional Committee for Africa-CONGO*
*-General Secretary, Civil Society Network of NGOs on Climate Change*
*-Fellow Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers-ICANN* *-Fellow Open Society Institute-Budapest*
On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 22:05, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
A few short further comments.
At 06/07/2019 07:28 AM, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
Thank you ALAN for your mail. I agree with you on some points and I disagree on others:
I agree with you that a consultation with the RALO is mandatory as per the ICANN Bylaw
I agree with you that any decision to accept or reject a RALO recommendation or appoint someone else is a decision of the ALAC
I also agree with you that there has been a distinct lack of communication in all directions in the current situation
And I finally agree with you that the proposal that Mohamed just made to have an internal selection process is the right way forward. It is based on Maureen’s proposal that I also applaud
But I strongly disagree with you that the ALAC Chair who is doing a reasonable job should make discreet (that is private and confidential) discussion with some ALAC members to make sure there is a strong consensus on how to proceed. The discussion must be with *all* ALAC members (except those who have a conflict of interest if any), in a closed meeting as we did in Panama last year, not with some of them. Why some and not all? I’m not with decisions prepared behind the doors among “a small group†of friends.
I cannot speak for Maureen, but I can say that in my experience (and there were far more than one instance where I was in a similar situation, the Chair may consult with those in the ALT, or with selected ALAC members. Reasons for NOT including a particular person may include (as you suggest) a conflict of interest (real or perceived) or not wanting to put the person in an awkward or uncomfortable position. In some cases, (as was the case last year), consultation with all may be appropriate. It is up to the Chair to decide what is best in a given case.
I also disagree with your allusion to the fact that if the RALO recommendation is not accepted, ALAC can appoint a delegate to the NomCom without going back to the RALO or even the RALO Chair. You were prudent enough to say “there is no formal requirement†. But even that, I disagree with because the formal requirement is in the bylaws article 12.2.(d)(v): The ALAC shall, after consultation with each RALO, annually appoint five voting delegates (no two of whom shall be citizens of countries in the same Geographic Region) to the Nominating Committee.
I think that one consultation meets the requirements. We will have to agree to disagree on this one.
So ALAC appoints *after* consultation with the concerned RALO, not directly without going back to the RALO. Your explanation is that since the RALO proposed a name, it was consulted. My explanation is different based on the fact that there is no formal permission to the ALAC to appoint without going back to the RALO, and on the fact that ICANN has a governance model based on a bottom up decision making system. If ALAC appoints without going back to the RALO, its decision is top down
My other disagreement is about your contestation about us often focus more on "democratic" procedures than on making sure we select knowledgeable and capable people for all positions.
Do you mean the democratic process prevents the selection of the best people???? Our AFRALO community shose so far very good delegates to the NomCom using their democratic process: Yaovi Atohoun, Mohamed El Bashir, Dave kissoondoyal, Fatimata Seye Sylla and Aziz Hilali. You can ask for their 360 evaluation to see that they performed very well. Also, this year, our community made a good choice but there was an issue for him.
I was not commenting on AFRALO recommendations for the NomCom in prior years. I was commenting on our appointment process in general where we have often had very unqualified candidates for various positions. In many cases they are not appointed for one reason or another. On some occasions, they are!
Do you think that Smaller group deciding instead of the whole members will make a better decision? How do you guarantee that this small group will not choose people that they want (not the best or the best among their friends)??
Of course, we need knowledgeable and capable people. I still think that the democratic process is the right one to have the best people if the eligibility criteria are well defined in advance for each position, and if they don’t change according to the will of the chair or any other influent person. The solution is not to have smaller number of persons deciding instead of the whole members. The solution is in a pre-defined objective eligibility criteria for each position.
I agree completely. It is the testing to see whether the criteria are met that I feel our current processes often do not address. Our processes presume that the electorate will carefully consider all of the issues. An example is where staff posted the WRONG EoI for a candidate (it was CLEARLY wrong) but no one in the electorate even noticed, so one has to ask on what basis the person was selected (regardless of whether they were indeed a good candidate). Selection committees doing triage should remedy that. That does not preclude a democratic election of those that meet the criteria.
Alan
ICANN is a bottom-up decision making organization. ALAC and At-Large must be and remain so as well.
Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca > a écrit :
I have avoided commenting during this process but now that we seem to be in a level postilion, I do have a few comments to make.
Please note that these comments are NOT in reference to ANY candidate but are in relation to the process.
- In accordance with the ICANN Bylaws and the ALAC Rules of Procedure (RoP), the Nominating Committee delegates are selected by the ALAC. A consultation with the RALO is mandatory.
- Any decision to accept a RALO recommendation or appoint someone else is a decision of the ALAC. The Chair may certainly make a recommendation, but ultimately it is an ALAC decision. Prior to a Chair making such a formal recommendation, if he or she is doing a reasonable job, there would have been discreet (that is private and confidential) discussion with some or all advisors and ALAC Members to make sure there is a strong consensus on how to proceed. That is the process that I have followed in a similar situation last year and it is my understanding is that this is exactly the process that Maureen has followed.
- If a RALO candidate is not ratified (or recommended to not be ratified), there is no formal requirement to go back to the RALO or even the RALO Chair.
- Since we regularly (over many years) seem to have various people not understanding the NomCom delegate selection process, perhaps it is time to clarify the ALAC RoP.
- All of the above notwithstanding, there has been a distinct lack of communications in all directions in the current situation, and that is a problem that needs to be rectified - and it cannot be fixed with rules.
- The proposal that Mohamed just made, to have an internal selection process is one I applaud. If I understood correctly Remmy Nweke had earlier made such a suggestion. In my opinion, we (and that is both the ALAC and all RALOs) have often focused more on "democratic" procedures and not sufficiently on making sure we select knowledgeable and capable people for all positions. It is not typically sufficient to simply ask for volunteers (who may or may not have ANY of the skills needed) and then have a vote that is really a popularity contest and not a true evaluation of the candidates. For the ALAC, the situation has been largely remedied with the ALAC Appointee Selection Committee that began 3 years ago.
Alan
_______________________________________________ AFRI-Discuss mailing list AFRI-Discuss@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 to this list are more accurate: http://www.funredes.org/mistica/english/emec/method_emec/presentation.html#a... _______________________________________________By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Tijani BENJEMAA* Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*) Telephone: +216 52 385 114
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ AFRI-Discuss mailing list AFRI-Discuss@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 to this list are more accurate: http://www.funredes.org/mistica/english/emec/method_emec/presentation.html#a... _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.