- zanog-discuss - lists.nog.net.za

Yet another TISPA case dismissed
by Andrew Alston 20 Jun '25

20 Jun '25

So - despite the order in court yesterday, and AfriNIC complying with the order that was issued, it seems TISPA was still attempting to get the election stopped, and once again, lost in court. Considering that the court ruled the NomCom was fair and in the spirit of the bylaws, and that the registered member issue had been resolved, I would love to know the motivation behind the continued attempts to get this election stopped. But, happily, the election continues. Thanks Andrew

2 1

Yet another TISPA case dismissed
by Paul Hjul 20 Jun '25

20 Jun '25

Clearly there is a concerted effort to use as a much of the courts time as possible. I don’t often read so much polite frustration in the writing of a court. “Sleep on rights”, “unclean hands” and “utterly fail to disclose” are not phrases (whether in an original form or modified to fit the sentence structure) you ever want to be the recipient of from a court. There has been a concerted effort to get pitchforks out against the Receiver and the Nom Com. I’ve looked at the order of judge Green-Jokhoo as posted to the lists and even before the clarity given in the communique it is quite clear that Cloud Innovations application was not brought to the exclusion of other members rights and if anything should have resulted in Afrinic finally recognising that resource members are the true equivalent of shareholders. Regardless of anybodies thoughts on Lu Heng it is a positive outcome for all resource members that a court has emphatically ended the years of nonsense of it being said that resource members are not proper members As I said in my earlier wall of text I suspected that there was some stupidity in optics coming from Cloud Innovation but that it is most likely a product of the continuous refusal of certain executive employees of Afrinic and of the legal representatives (currently without a mandate) for Afrinic in their dealing with resource members. But it is more than mildly curious that Afrinic (first respondent) was ordered in the second part of the order to rectify the company registry and that all that it did was make the record even more misleading.

1 0

Fwd: Please, co-sign Dave Taht's nomination for Jonathan B. Postel Service Award
by Frantisek Borsik 19 Jun '25

19 Jun '25

Hey guys, I know that there is AFRINIC election on you mind, but - we are going to submit Dave Taht's nomination for Jonathan B. Postel Service Award, ASAP. Dave's work on many important algorithms that are making our lives on the Internet better today was profound and his sudden departure hit the whole bufferbloat / open source community hard. If you feel like co-signing it, I would be thankful. Best of luck with the election. May it finally bring some reason and stability to AFRINIC. All the best, Frank Frantisek (Frank) Borsik *In loving memory of Dave Täht: *1965-2025 https://libreqos.io/2025/04/01/in-loving-memory-of-dave/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714 iMessage, mobile: +420775230885 Skype: casioa5302ca frantisek.borsik(a)gmail.com ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Frantisek Borsik <frantisek.borsik(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 9:46 PM Subject: Please, co-sign Dave Taht's nomination for Jonathan B. Postel Service Award To: libreqos <libreqos(a)lists.bufferbloat.net>, bloat < bloat(a)lists.bufferbloat.net>, Dave Taht via Starlink < starlink(a)lists.bufferbloat.net>, Jeremy Austin via Rpm < rpm(a)lists.bufferbloat.net>, <bloat-ietf(a)lists.bufferbloat.net>, Cake List < cake(a)lists.bufferbloat.net>, <codel(a)lists.bufferbloat.net>, < l4s-discuss(a)ietf.org> Cc: Herbert Wolverson <hwolverson(a)libreqos.io>, Robert Chacón < robert(a)libreqos.io> Hello to all, It's my great pleasure to send out this email. Dave's nomination is ready to be co-signed *HERE <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hRtD9xE6H9cJGQaKIXHi_f_HpoRNK4-4-lS1ZwY…>* (Google Docs). We are also looking for at least 2 (but the more, the better!) people that would be willing to write us letters of recommendation that are needed to be attached to the nomination <https://wp.apps.internetsociety.org/wp/postel-award/nomination-form/>. I'm please to announce, that Vint Cerf will be a nominal nominator and we all know that Dave will appreciate it as much as we all do! Looking forward to see co-signees pouring in, as well as volunteers willing to write the letter. *We need to submit it ASAP, the deadline for the nomination is July 11.* Thank you very much. PS: In order to learn more about the award, please visit its website <https://www.internetsociety.org/grants-and-awards/postel-service-award/#tim…> . All the best, Frank Frantisek (Frank) Borsik *In loving memory of Dave Täht: *1965-2025 https://libreqos.io/2025/04/01/in-loving-memory-of-dave/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714 iMessage, mobile: +420775230885 Skype: casioa5302ca frantisek.borsik(a)gmail.com

1 0

ICANN intervention
by Paul Hjul 19 Jun '25

19 Jun '25

As I've said before, it's most likely that a confluence of daftness explains it. Cloud Innovation is in the position of a creditor who is quite jealously guarding the claim, so under almost any system of law some sort of record or charge arises. The Companies registry should indicate that Afrinic is currently without "registered members" and that there are no directors in office. It should further indicate that the receiver is in office. It should also say who the company secretary is and it should say that there are no auditors appointed for the company. What the record really should be saying is that Afrinic is profoundly non-compliant as a company. I fear that the fact that there are no "registered members" creates a massive problem - and it would in any jurisdiction - but this problem arises because when Afrinic was established the bizarre jumping around to prevent Afrinic from being a public company limited by guarantee and to rather make it a "private company". It is also quite clearly the case that some "insiders" thought that by creating a myth that resource members aren't proper members nobody would be able to hold Afrinic accountable. There might be an argument to allow the associate members to assume the responsibility of registered members but other than Elkins and Akplogan I really don't know who that would be and its an argument that has other problems. However there is a better and simpler stance to take which is that Afrinic ought to only have one class of member and being a resource member should carry with it all rights and that all resource members should be eligible to be "registered" by depositing 500 rupees into a reserve fund. At the end of the day it is more likely that somebody from Afrinic's executive staff (an officer of the company) instructed the company secretary to file information with the company registry and that the company secretary made this filing than that Cloud Innovation would make a change to the company record at the registry. The trouble is that the document which has caused all this noise is not an official document. When a person considers that C&A Law (https://www.calaw.mu/our-people/) was specifically appointed in 2021 (https://afrinic.net/board/meeting/2021) "for the purpose of consolidating AFRINIC's legal team in ensuring the defence of AFRINIC" and that same firm is involved in developing corporate governance systems they should probably be asked the question. But honestly weren't you the person who first drew attention to the unofficial record in the first place? The problem isn't the "MU legal system" - many enterprises choose Mauritius regularly because of the legal system. There are choices made about the operation of the legal system which represent trade offs that I critique. My biggest challenge with the Mauritius legal system is that it involves and includes French and I've found that there is a certain jumping through hoops that can be frustrating. The Rule of Law Project has expressed concern as to Mauritius constraints on government power and lack of open government initiatives- for this reason Rwanda actually climbs up in their rankings- neither of which are really the first thing multinationals look at first. Moreover importantly they are reasons trying to get the Mauritian government to interfere with the courts is a problem. If the "MU legal system" was the problem then the guys running dotAfrica wouldn't have adopted Mauritius as their domicile. The problem is the very specific attempt at abusing the Mauritius legal system that has been built into the ethos of Afrinic. I also do think that there is a problem of Americans simply not understanding things and the fact that a lot of commentary about the Mauritius legal system is made by people who simply do not have any respect for the rule of law. Let me be perfectly clear here the Receiver had no legitimate basis to object to any resource member (or industry representative association who can show a mandate from resource members) who wished to intervene. The legal representatives were clear that they are not parties and moved to be permitted to be heard. ICANN lacked standing to bring the application. The Receiver made no objection to ICANN being heard. There is no indication that the Receiver has ever objected to ICANN being heard even if not a party. On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 15:23, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com> wrote: > It's interesting the court classifies the addition of Cloud Innovation to > the Register as erroneous, this is not just something that one gets to > enter by mistake. The addition and removal of directors could not have been > done without specific documented directive to the company secretary. > > I wonder how the Receiver is going to justify that current nomcom > composition is inline with the spirit of the bylaw. > > More concerning is that counsel to the receiver had no objection when > Cloud Innovation Limited (CIL) counsel sought to be in attendance and to > intervene. Looks like CIL counsel and that of the Receiver are a team. > > I don't even know what to say anymore about MU's legal system > > Regards > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 07:43, Paul Hjul <hjul.paul(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> It would help if I added the attachment... >> >> >> On Thu, 19 Jun 2025, 2:40 pm Paul Hjul <hjul.paul(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Earlier today ICANN appeared at court. From the minutes of proceedings >>> their application would have delayed the election. I can't fault ICANNs >>> motivation and until I see something in an affidavit to suggest otherwise I >>> have high confidence that the evidence of John Crain and Samantha Eisner >>> are truthful and we're of assistance to the court. There does appear to be >>> the old routine found when Americans encounter a British legal system a >>> misunderstanding of the independent legal profession crops up and somebody >>> commenting on The Register remarked with sufficient snark about ICANN and >>> conflicts of interest. I doubt it will ever be admitted but it's quite >>> clear that the narrative around the erroneous record leading to an >>> unofficial document saying something absurd has been spun about sideways. >>> >>> Technically the ordered aspects of this are not actually by virtue of >>> ICANNs application but rather flow from the jurisdiction of the court over >>> the receivership and holding of the elections. >>> >>> If this development is anything to go by though by Monday we might just >>> learn something altogether more interesting about efforts to derail the >>> election by people who really just don't want Afrinic to follow it's own >>> bylaws and the law of Mauritius. >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Members-Discuss mailing list >> Members-Discuss(a)afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss >> > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Seun Ojedeji,* > > Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action! > > >

1 0

ICANN intervention
by Paul Hjul 19 Jun '25

19 Jun '25

Earlier today ICANN appeared at court. From the minutes of proceedings their application would have delayed the election. I can't fault ICANNs motivation and until I see something in an affidavit to suggest otherwise I have high confidence that the evidence of John Crain and Samantha Eisner are truthful and we're of assistance to the court. There does appear to be the old routine found when Americans encounter a British legal system a misunderstanding of the independent legal profession crops up and somebody commenting on The Register remarked with sufficient snark about ICANN and conflicts of interest. I doubt it will ever be admitted but it's quite clear that the narrative around the erroneous record leading to an unofficial document saying something absurd has been spun about sideways. Technically the ordered aspects of this are not actually by virtue of ICANNs application but rather flow from the jurisdiction of the court over the receivership and holding of the elections. If this development is anything to go by though by Monday we might just learn something altogether more interesting about efforts to derail the election by people who really just don't want Afrinic to follow it's own bylaws and the law of Mauritius.

1 1

Mail received from the NRS
by Andrew Alston 19 Jun '25

19 Jun '25

Just got this email from the NRS (Lu Hengs outfit) I would like to say that while I am explicitly not endorsing any candidates - I am saying I cannot and will not support any of the below candidates in any way shape or form. Andrew ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Number Resource Society <info(a)news.nrs.help> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 11:00 Subject: Your Voice, Your Vote – Support the Future of AFRINIC To: <aa(a)alstonnetworks.net> [image: icon_afrbg] Hi AFRINIC Community, We’re at a pivotal moment—and your vote can reclaim AFRINIC for its members Our Election Pledge 01 Legal IP Ownership Your IPs secured with title deeds, permanently yours. 02 No Membership Fees Fair and free access to internet resources. 03 Financial Stability & Transparency A self-sustaining, corruption-free AFRINIC. NRS-ENDORSED CANDIDATES These leaders share this vision—champions of fairness, accountability, and digital rights. This is more than an election—it’s a charter for change. [image: icon_afrbg] SEAT ONE North AFRICA Hamza Bourougaa [image: icon_afrbg] SEAT TWO West AFRICA Terry Edet Okon [image: icon_afrbg] SEAT THREE Indian Ocean Dewandranath Kissoondoyal [image: icon_afrbg] SEAT FOUR Central AFRICA Cedric Andre Yana [image: icon_afrbg] SEAT FIVE Southern AFRICA Paul Wollner [image: icon_afrbg] SEAT SIX Eastern AFRICA Ephraim Hensley Okalebo [image: icon_afrbg] SEAT SEVEN Region-Independent Michiel Jacobus Bester [image: icon_afrbg] SEAT EIGHT Region-Independent Petrus Phillipus Willemse [image: icon_afrbg] Your Vote Counts. It’s your voice for legal IP ownership, accessible membership, and good governance. Stand with us for a brighter AFRINIC future.

7 11

Re: [members-discuss] Re: Mail received from the NRS
by Andrew Alston 19 Jun '25

19 Jun '25

No - it’s because I don’t wish to make accusations without evidence. I believe very strongly in evidence to back allegations - and yes I want to see the grounds under which an entity attempted to derail an election. If there is nothing to hide so be it Andrew On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 12:48, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah you can easily assume it was dismissed for good reason, what then is > the essence of sharing since case is closed. Is it so you can further call > out sections of the petition to confirm your suspicion. > > I will conclude by quoting you below. Read it, then look yourself in the > mirror: > > It concerns me greatly that this community has reached a point where every > little thing is distrusted and accusations fly - because it isn’t conducive > to ever fixing AfriNIC > > Regards > ---- > Sent from my mobile > kindly excuse typos > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2025, 4:12 am Andrew Alston, <aa(a)alstonnetworks.net> wrote: > >> And Noah (TISPA)’s court order got tossed out. And I believe for good >> reason and for the good of the continent >> >> For the sake of transparency though there is now nothing preventing them >> from showing us that application - since it is no longer sub judice - it’s >> a concluded matter >> >> >> Andrew >> >> On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 12:08, Amin Dayekh <admin(a)megamore.ng> wrote: >> >>> The receiver told Noah and I think it was directed to all members, to go >>> to court >>> >>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 9:50 AM, Hendrik Visage via zanog-discuss < >>> zanog-discuss(a)lists.nog.net.za> wrote: >>> >>>> At present you’ll have to ask the silent OR... >>>> >>>> On 19 Jun 2025, at 10:38, Andrew Alston via zanog-discuss < >>>> zanog-discuss(a)lists.nog.net.za> wrote: >>>> >>>> I would like to know the legality of the use of the AfriNIC logo in >>>> this email - I would have thought that may be trademark infringement - or >>>> at the very least blatant misrepresentation >>>> >>>> Andrew >>>> >>>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 11:22, Shawn Jooste <shawn(a)rockingconnect.co.za> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Got this email, too, and agree. Same. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2025, at 10:06, Andrew Alston via zanog-discuss wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Just got this email from the NRS (Lu Hengs outfit) >>>>> >>>>> I would like to say that while I am explicitly not endorsing any >>>>> candidates - I am saying I cannot and will not support any of the below >>>>> candidates in any way shape or form. >>>>> >>>>> Andrew >>>>> >>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>>> From: *Number Resource Society* <info(a)news.nrs.help> >>>>> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 11:00 >>>>> Subject: Your Voice, Your Vote – Support the Future of AFRINIC >>>>> To: <aa(a)alstonnetworks.net> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> Hi AFRINIC Community, >>>>> >>>>> We’re at a pivotal moment—and your vote can reclaim AFRINIC for its >>>>> members >>>>> >>>>> Our Election Pledge >>>>> >>>>> 01 >>>>> Legal IP Ownership >>>>> Your IPs secured with title deeds, permanently yours. >>>>> >>>>> 02 >>>>> No Membership Fees >>>>> Fair and free access to internet resources. >>>>> >>>>> 03 >>>>> Financial Stability & Transparency >>>>> A self-sustaining, corruption-free AFRINIC. >>>>> >>>>> NRS-ENDORSED CANDIDATES >>>>> >>>>> These leaders share this vision—champions of fairness, accountability, >>>>> and digital rights. This is more than an election—it’s a charter for change. >>>>> >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> SEAT ONE >>>>> North AFRICA >>>>> Hamza Bourougaa >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> SEAT TWO >>>>> West AFRICA >>>>> Terry Edet Okon >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> SEAT THREE >>>>> Indian Ocean >>>>> Dewandranath Kissoondoyal >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> SEAT FOUR >>>>> Central AFRICA >>>>> Cedric Andre Yana >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> SEAT FIVE >>>>> Southern AFRICA >>>>> Paul Wollner >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> SEAT SIX >>>>> Eastern AFRICA >>>>> Ephraim Hensley Okalebo >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> SEAT SEVEN >>>>> Region-Independent >>>>> Michiel Jacobus Bester >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> SEAT EIGHT >>>>> Region-Independent >>>>> Petrus Phillipus Willemse >>>>> [image: icon_afrbg] >>>>> Your Vote Counts. >>>>> It’s your voice for legal IP ownership, accessible membership, and >>>>> good governance. >>>>> Stand with us for a brighter AFRINIC future. >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> zanog-discuss mailing list -- zanog-discuss(a)lists.nog.net.za >>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to zanog-discuss-leave(a)lists.nog.net.za >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> zanog-discuss mailing list -- zanog-discuss(a)lists.nog.net.za >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to zanog-discuss-leave(a)lists.nog.net.za >>>> >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> Hendrik Visage >>>> >>>> hvisage(a)hevis.co.za >>>> >>>> >>>> HeViS.Co Systems Pty Ltd >>>> >>>> https://www.envisage.co.za >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> zanog-discuss mailing list -- zanog-discuss(a)lists.nog.net.za >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to zanog-discuss-leave(a)lists.nog.net.za >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> Members-Discuss mailing list >> Members-Discuss(a)afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss >> >

1 0

Re: Another take on the AfriNIC elections and the TISPA injunction
by Paul Hjul 17 Jun '25

17 Jun '25

There have been a number of similar applications published here https://afrinic.net/court-cases and I don't remember you asking the plaintiffs to share such court documents that are subject to proceedings *publicly* especially when the matter is *sub judice*. I encourage you to respect the court process, her ladyship, the Hon.judge and the legal teams. *Sub iudice* does not mean what you think it means. There are rules and practices designed to promote the sanctity and authority of courts in addressing matters before them and this relates to the fact that a matter is under the aegis of the judicial authority. *Sub iudice* does not mean that you can use the court as an excuse against valid disclosure. Doing so is actually disrespectful to the court. The TISPA injunction application failed to name the individuals who are nominees for the board, it fails to name parties who have ongoing (that is *sub iudice*) proceedings which are affected by the injunction. Any one of these affected parties who wishes to contemplate entering an application to be joined to the proceedings or to file cause for the *ex parte nisi* not to be made interlocutory. For this reason alone it is highly dishonest to not inform Andrew – and the public at large – of those particulars necessary to enable same to step in prior to the order being made interlocutory. If the affidavit makes untruthful claims then any claim that the public interest of not having pre-emptive knowledge of evidence to be lead in court circulating is overridden by the judicial interest in persons with knowledge that the claims are untruthful being afforded the ability to step forward with that knowledge. Let me step in as somebody who not only has experience in litigation in Mauritius (including dealing with Afrinic) but also on a near daily basis engages with Mauritius legal practitioners in a professional context. Mauritius has developed a bit of an odd – and open to legitimate criticism but frankly it's been the recipient of uninformed diatribe – culture and ethos around the dissemination of information around legal proceedings. A lot of this stems from Mauritius as an offshore jurisdiction with parties engaging in arbitration which is confidential. What has taken hold is the idea that until proceedings have happened in open court and been brought to finality there is a general confidentiality adopted on the documents. This is quite different from the situation in South Africa where I can request to be afforded access to a file that is at the court either as a researcher or because an NGO wishes to make an informed position. However, anybody involved in professional journalism will know that you don’t publish certain information prior to it being heard in court and the basic fact that documents can’t magically lose confidentiality considerations just because somebody makes them an annexure to an affidavit still holds. All matters I’ve been involved in with telcos have publicly accessible redacted records and records which are only for the legal team (not even the parties themselves) and the judge. Sensitive commercial information presents a challenge conceptually to the idea of open justice and different jurisdictions tackle this differently. Mauritius is chosen often because it's perceived to be more tolerant of secretiveness. More to the point here though: The contents of the application – particularly its affidavit – has already been considered by the court, the parties to the proceedings have been served and no harm to proceedings arises from the contents being in the public domain. It is therefore entirely a feature of practice (more than law) in Mauritius that litigants are afforded a greater room to assert confidentiality than in most other jurisdictions. And the *sub iudice *rule and doctrine is not the reason Noah does not want people to read the documents. If it was genuine deference to legal advice to be cautious then he would have no difficulty giving his consent to the documents being published. As I’ve repeatedly indicated Crystal Web (Pty) Ltd consents to the dissemination and publication of those documents pertaining to judicial proceedings to which Crystal Web is a party and which documents have not been “read in open court”. Unfortunately, Afrinic (and the $1000 per hour legal practitioners) will not consent to resource members knowing what is actually happening. I naturally cannot speak for any other party to litigation but my own experience is that even if there is no good reason for Afrinic to wish to keep information hidden – with selective and misleading disclosures – that the executive employees will oppose the publication of documentation in the public interest. So yes – it is true that a person with possession of copies of the documents pertaining to TISPA’s application should refrain from publishing and widely disseminating those documents. This is until the consent of the parties to publication is given and the court is informed. It is equally true that neither Noah Maina (who is commenting as if he has actual knowledge of the documents and is likely an affiant) nor TISPA have expressed their consent to the documents being published in the public interest. It is equally true that affected parties have a right to request a copy of the documents in the possession of Maina and TISPA and Afrinic and the Receiver. More importantly, TISPA probably have more to worry about from ICANNs lawyers than anybody else. Paul Speaking on behalf of Crystal Web (Pty) Ltd But also a beach town quasi hippy with a British law degree Paul AH Hjul BA (Rhodes University), LLM (University of London, specialism in Corporate and Commercial Law) Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.

1 0

Another take on the AfriNIC elections and the TISPA injunction
by Andrew Alston 17 Jun '25

17 Jun '25

Hi All, I am going to refrain from commenting on my views on any candidates - other than to say that I believe that directors of AfriNIC need to have business and directorship experience, and we need to realize that the board does not play a technical function, it runs a company, and in this case, a company with deep seated legal issues (and probably political issues as well), and in my view the only questions that really need answering about the candidates are - do they have the business acumen and experience leading corporate entities so they can resolve the issues we are faced with. That being said, I did want to comment on the TISPA injunction. Whoever thought this was a good idea - clearly hadn't read the bylaws. The court order as it stands does not allow for any election to take place - it is impossible to fully comply with the bylaws and hold an election at the current time. Let me explain: a.) First - the bylaws specify that elections are held at a quorate AGMM - at this point - it is not possible to get that quorum. To elaborate on this - there is a claim that someone could ask the court to appoint interim directors purely for the purpose of holding an election, and this would make the meeting quorate. These claims are categorically false. Article 12.10.ii of the bylaws sets the quorum, and it is explicit, that quorum is made up of 4 directors ELECTED to represent a region, 1 director ELECTED as a non-regional director, and 5 resource members. Key to this is the word ELECTED - appointed directors do not count towards quorum. b.) The bylaws explicitly state a list of things that have to be in the notice of meeting, and that said notice of meeting has to be distributed to the secretary, every member, every director and the auditor of the company. The company currently has no auditor - hence - article 12.2.i cannot be complied with c.) In the event of (b) not being complied with - a waiver can be granted if *every* member, unanimously, agrees to waive the irregularity in the notice of meeting. I do not see that happening. d.) Article 12.14 permits members to submit proposals to be heard at an AGMM. Said proposals have to be submitted to the board - we currently have no board - making it impossible to comply with article 12.14 e.) Under the bylaws directors are appointed in a specific sequence - again - this is hugely problematic in terms of an election that complies to the bylaws, since, members are explicitly elected to hold a 3 year term, and the bylaws don't allow for that to be altered, which breaks the sequential election (This is found in article 13.5/13.6) f.) The only variation of (e) is the powers granted to the board to elect to fulfill a casual vacancy - but that power is only granted to a sitting board - which we don't have - and said board members would not count towards quorum anyway due to point (a) Effectively, what the TISPA injunction does, is order something that is fundamentally impossible - and hence - that order is now going to have to be challenged, and overturned, because if an attempt is made to hold an election while that order stands - the election can be challenged by anyone for not complying with the bylaws and its back to square one we go. Basically, that injunction by TISPA was clearly done without any understanding of what they were asking the court for, and accomplishes absolutely nothing other than to ensure further delays and create more grounds under which people can dispute any election that is held. It was, in my opinion, short sighted, showed a complete lack of knowledge and homework into the bylaws, and does nothing but hurt the chances of us ever getting AfriNIC back on its feet. It would not surprise me in the slightest if the new ICP-2 document comes into force before we actually get an election and it also would not shock me in the slightest if AfriNIC was then replaced should that happen - because its clear that the community in Africa is not acting in a manner consistent with fixing AfriNIC - if they were - the election would be proceeding. Just my thoughts Andrew

7 19

WC NOG
by Shawn Jooste 10 Jun '25

10 Jun '25

ZANOG <https://nog.net.za/> is happy to announce our next regional Network Operator Group meeting (Western Cape) of 2025 at Workshop17, Gardens , South Africa. *Please note the change of venue* ZANOG is an in person only event and will take place on Thursday 26 June 2025 We will be having the usual evening talks, followed by drinks, snacks and social networking. Talks will start at 18h30, but we encourage arrivals from 18h00 for a bit of mingling, before the event. Local NOGs are a great place to share stories or what you have been working on. let us know if you would like to share your story email us info[at]nog.net.za A big thank you to FLEXOPTIX <https://www.flexoptix.net/> for their support and sponsorship of ZANOG 2025 events. Register here, as space is limited: https://events.nog.net.za/event/65/

1 0

2026

2025

2024

zanog-discuss