Nishal,
That is very correct, double check
On the other hand, contingency planning is indeed a healthy part of governance, and I appreciate your clarification. At the same time, I must (respectfully) say that my concern is not about whether options existed, but about how and when they were raised. The fact that I may not speak of certain matters does not mean I am unaware of them. This goes back as far as 2021 or 2022.
If you had been present in that meeting, you would have realised that this was not presented as a neutral “contingency.” Relocation was raised not as a distant possibility, but in a way that suggested it was already being shaped as a community consensus even though such proposals had been on the table since 2020–2021 and were already rejected. The very framing of the question “should AFRINIC relocate, and to which country?” at a time when the Registry was under severe legal and institutional pressure, created the impression of a community-driven mandate that did not truly exist.
Moreover, in this election a segment of our membership cannot even vote, because of earlier court orders. Would it not have been more strategic, through the same Smart Africa engagement, to focus our collective effort on lifting those chains, safeguarding AFRINIC’s survival, and strengthening the foundations of governance rather than opening relocation as the headline discussion? From a strategic and marketing perspective, such timing sends the wrong signal to members and governments, especially when ministers are themselves being drawn into the conversation.
Perhaps the most responsible course now is to allow the new Board to settle and to concentrate on repairing governance, protecting the membership, and restoring trust in the Registry. That is where the community’s strength lies.
And finally, without any sense of discrimination but as a simple observation, I do find it striking that the call for “new blood” is directed at some, while at the same time, very familiar old faces continue to appear on the same lists. Renewal is important, but it must be genuine, not selective.
Kind regards,
Amin Dayekh
On 10 Sep 2025, at 11:24, Amin Dayekh via zanog-discuss wrote:
> It is no longer news that there are plans to relocate afrinic to Ehiopia
this is incorrect.
there are _several_ countries that are being considered as a “safe haven” for a future … african registry.
ET was considered because for obvious reasons (flight hub, home of AUC, ..). it’s not my place to discuss and explain each of the rest - except to say that, if a future african registry had to relocate to *anywhere* it would *absolutely* require the assistance of the receiving country’s government. again, the reasons should be self-evident (tax exemptions, visas, etc.).
and having a recognised IGO paving the way for those discussions to begin, is not the ragnarok that people claim it is. in fact, i would say it’s quite healthy, because they bring gravitas to any negotiating table.
what you *should* have taken away from that call is “here are options; go discuss”
that’s called: “planning for contingencies”. which, is healthy.
don’t confuse that with “conspiracy”.
there are several iterations of what a future “fixed” afrinic might look like. it is too early to speculate what the final outcome would be, but whatever that is can not happen without buy-in from afrinic’s membership. if you are trying to imply that smartafrica doesn’t recognise this, or is seeking to subvert that, then, goto (1).
—n.
_______________________________________________
zanog-discuss mailing list -- zanog-discuss@lists.nog.net.za
To unsubscribe send an email to zanog-discuss-leave@lists.nog.net.za