[kictanet] Official response to the "facts" circulated by Alice on behalf of DotConnectAfrica

[Gideon]

Dear Ms.Alice Munyua,



I am asked by our organization to post this clarification below to the
statements you posted last week *Re:**Facts Regarding the African Union
Commission (.Africa) application* in the interest of the public.

* *

*That you ahead for your cooperation.*

* *

*First,* the deliberate *distortion that AUC/UniForum has submitted an
application for .AFRICA is unwarranted and quite misleading,* and this
should not be *treated as 'fact'*. The true fact is that the AUC is not an
applicant. Only UniForum is the applicant acknowledged by ICANN. Therefore,
it is *untruthful and rather disingenuous on your part to present the AUC
as an applicant - either as a co- or joint applicant to UniForum*. Everyone
should know that the AU has not applied to ICANN for anything, so there is
no AUC application the way that you have been distorting 'facts' to suit
your purpose.



*Second,* though you have listed many things, the most important thing that
you have left out is that the *UniForum application was not submitted on
behalf of either the African Union Commission, African governments,
the African  Community or African Internet Community*. You should have
listed this as '*fact'*, but you have not. Therefore*, there is actually no
community ownership of the Applied-for string *so your use of the term
*'official
AUC endorsed application for the dotAfrica (.Africa) Top Level Domain*' is
rather *specious and a misnomer*.   Against this background, how is the
UniForum application, in your estimation, *"a collaborative African
initiative"?*  One would expect at least that if it is a collaborative
African initiative, *then the ownership of the TLD by the community should
have been properly demonstrated by a community application conveyed as an
application on behalf of the African Community for a .AFRICA Community TLD*.




In the absence of this, we still see the UniForum application as a *deceptive
ploy* that  used the purported support of the AU Commission to garner
support from African governments to enable them provide support for an
application that *will benefit a special interest group*.  *The way we see
it is quite simple: DCA Trust will continue to expose this fraud for what
it truly is*.  If the AUC provided support to UniForum to apply on behalf
of the African Community, then we believe that “*a Community TLD application
* “for .AFRICA should have been submitted by UniForum to ICANN.



*Third,* you seem to make much of a process that was "*mandated by African
Heads of State (OR Tambo Declaration) and African Minister’s in charge of
ICT (Abuja Declaration)" to justify your 'facts'*. Would these African
Heads of States and Ministers *not demand some form of
accountability regarding why a community TLD application for .Africa was
not submitted by Uniforum?*   Since you seem to know many facts regarding
the so-called 'African Union Commission (.Africa) application, perhaps you
should help clarify for everyone's benefit why a Community TLD application
for .Africa was not submitted by Uniforum.



*Fourth,*  you have tried to make much over the fact that the *UniForum
application is AU-supported*, and that *the "application meets and exceeds,
the minimum evaluation criteria set by ICANN for application of Geographic
strings." Alas, the evaluation is not only on the basis of the evaluation
criteria for 'geographic strings'*. The evaluation criteria is actually
more comprehensive, and covers a wide range of issues such as *technical,
operational, financial criteria; coupled with terms & conditions, legal
issues, etc.*  We remain confident that the Uniforum application
will fail based on the scope of its separate agreement with the African
Union Commission.  We prefer to leave such issues to the Evaluation and the
outcome of any Dispute Resolution.



*Fifth,* the application submitted by DCA Trust is for the geographic name
'AFRICA', pronounced as 'DotAfrica'. *This is for a 6-character ASCII string
*. The application submitted by DCA Trust was correctly designated by ICANN
as referring to a geographic name. Your understanding that it is for
'dotdotAfrica' is incorrect.  Our published part of application is posted
and available here…………………

*Finally*, it is important for us to note that you have become *openly
supportive of the UniForum application*, and we therefore hope that you
will not *use any of your official affiliations either within the Kenyan
government or the ICANN GAC* to influence things in their favour. We
caution you not to be official or unofficial spokesperson of UniForum, and
allow the applications that have been submitted to ICANN to be evaluated
fairly without any undue interference on your part or on the part of the
group that you now seem to represent in the most unabashed manner .


DotConnectAfrica.






On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:13 PM, <kictanet-request at lists.kictanet.or.ke>wrote:

> Send kictanet mailing list submissions to
>         kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         kictanet-request at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         kictanet-owner at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of kictanet digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Freedom of Information Bill and Open Standards (Victor Kapiyo)
>    2. Re: Fwd: FW: KENIC - on behalf of Sammy Buruchara (Walubengo J)
>    3. PesaPal Developer Community (Agosta Liko)
>    4. Facts Regarding the African Union Commission (.Africa)
>       application (Alice Munyua)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:59:02 +0300
> From: Victor Kapiyo <vkapiyo at gmail.com>
> To: ke-users <ke-internetusers at bdix.net>,  KICTAnet ICT Policy
>         Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Freedom of Information Bill and Open Standards
> Message-ID:
>         <CAMKaekpBNLxh-tuQyudpa56QEn9ovVRC=mC=_
> vz8+KpTZ5XbCg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Interesting observations Evans.
>
> I would be interested to know what the Directorate of E-government has done
> especially with regard to facilitating digitisation of processes,
> collection and release of data by government, such that they would be able
> to tell us the kind of formats that are being used and whether these
> standards are indeed open, and if not why. Btw, is there a govt position on
> the use open standards?
>
> Likewise, and with regard to IEBC process, we would need to be informed
> whether the software in use is open source. I am not sure about the release
> of code to the general masses - but probably it would be useful to IT
> security experts for audit. Nevertheless, it would be important to release
> information on how the software & the process works as part of their
> responsibility in being transparent & accountable - i just saw them launch
> sth on telly today.
>
> Lastly, on FOI, for me its not so much what the bill should or shouldn't
> say, but its more our interpretation of Art. 35 of the Constitution. Such
> that any technology (e.g. icts, open standards, open data, open govt,
> digitisation etc) that would facilitate the right are adopted and promoted
> and technologies or practices e.g. not keeping data in electronic format -
> as mentioned by Rad! above, would be abolished as they inhibit and
> frustrate the enjoyment of the right.
>
> My two cents.
>
> Victor
>
> --
> Victor Kapiyo, LL.B
>
> ====================================================
> *?Your attitude, not your aptitude, will determine your altitude? Zig
> Ziglar
> *
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20120726/f84d0a56/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 05:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Walubengo J <jwalu at yahoo.com>
> To: Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo at gmail.com>, buruchara at me.com
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Fwd: FW: KENIC - on behalf of Sammy Buruchara
> Message-ID:
>         <1343305706.2550.YahooMailClassic at web160605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Thnx Sammy B. for the rejoinder....
>
> At least we do have the two sides of the story.? And now, it is up to the
> Listers to show up in numbers at the AGM and get the detailed aspects of
> both stories and hopefully come out with KENIC as the winner. In
> particular, I believe the Bylaws/Constitution for KENIC is up for review.
> Maybe Sammy could share a copy/url?
>
> Biggest problem with most Listers is that they are active online - but
> never get time to attend physical meetings to make the difference they
> yearn for.
>
> Typical, Kenyan middle-class syndrome :-)
>
> walu.
> --- On Thu, 7/26/12, Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo at gmail.com>
> Subject: [kictanet] Fwd: FW: KENIC - on behalf of Sammy Buruchara
> To: jwalu at yahoo.com
> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Date: Thursday, July 26, 2012, 2:24 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ?
>
> From: Sammy Buruchara [mailto:sammy at nbnet.co.ke]
>
>
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 10:40 AM
> To: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions (kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke)
> Subject: KENIC
>
> ?RE: Online discussions on Resignations of Board at the Kenya Network
> Information Centre (KeNIC)
>
> Reference is made to the various online discussions regarding resignations
> of Board members of at the Kenya Network Information Centre (KeNIC).The
> KeNIC board and management? would like? to take this early opportunity to
> refute these claims as having no basis and without factual information.
>
> Early this year, the KeNIC Board, while carrying out a mid-term review of
> the implementation of its Strategic plan, agreed on the? need for KeNIC to
> carry out an Institutional Assessment to ensure that it operates? in line
> with the international best practices and that its operations are aligned
> to its Strategic plan.
>
> A Consultant was tasked by KeNIC to carry out the Institutional Assessment
> and in their report, which was adopted by the KeNIC board, established a
> number of areas that KeNIC needed to address, to remain in business as well
> as to improve in its core mandate of registering dot KE domain names. The
> following is an highlight of the areas needing action:
>
> 1.????? The alignment of the Board membership to the KeNIC?s Memorandum
> and Articles of Association. 2.????? A review of the current Strategic Plan
> to align it to realistic Goals and Targets in the light of changing market
> conditions.
>
> 3.????? A review of the KeNIC Stakeholders to reflect its core
> business.4.????? Development and strengthening of KeNIC?s Financial and
> Procurement policies, among other policies.
>
> 5.????? Review of the management structure to reflect the revised
> Strategic Plan.KeNIC Board has diligently followed through the Consultant?s
> Institutional Assessment report by implementing the recommendations
> contained in the report with the aim of strengthening KeNIC?s? operations.
> Inevitably, the implementation of the report is going to affect the
> constitution of the KeNIC board. However, the board wishes to remain intact
> until the AGM, after which its board membership will change, after the
> adoption by the AGM. In view of this, it?s important to note that those
> board members who have since resigned, they have done so voluntarily, and
> most of them have been replaced by their appointing member organizations.
>
> KeNIC is due to hold its Annual General Meeting (AGM) in August 2012 (next
> month) to update its stakeholders on the progress of this process, among
> other reports scheduled for presentation and discussion during the AGM.
>
> The KeNIC board and management would therefore wish to dispel any rumors
> of an alleged crisis in KeNIC, and to state categorically that there is no
> crisis at in KeNIC and that the Board and management are fully discharging
> their duties of ensuring KeNIC is run professionally and in line with? the
> international best practices.
>
> ?Sammy BurucharaChange Manager
>
> ??
> --
>
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>
> dangerous content by
>  KeNIC MailScanner, and is
>
> believed to be clean.
>
>
> Kenya Network Information Centre (KeNIC).
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform
> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20120726/afbcaf64/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 18:25:16 +0300
> From: Agosta Liko <agostal at gmail.com>
> To: Skunkworks Mailing List <skunkworks at lists.my.co.ke>,  KICTAnet ICT
>         Policy Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Subject: [kictanet] PesaPal Developer Community
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAAgAc7_0w9HddR4DwDG33YAXOJ9SQOf5UjrLHOU52JXUv3mC5g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi
>
> We have launched our developer community at http://developer.pesapal.com/
>
> We will monitor and answer questions raised in our forums and we intend to
> use them as a developer exchange/resource
>
> Here we share how to documents, showcase sample sites, have a list of
> proven PesaPal integrators
>
> We will add more PesaPal Integrator shortly ... we will also add ready to
> use plugins, components and extensions
>
> Thanks
>
> Agosta Liko
> PesaPal.COM
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20120726/3f6e6f41/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 20:10:19 +0300
> From: Alice Munyua <alice at apc.org>
> To: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Subject: [kictanet] Facts Regarding the African Union Commission
>         (.Africa)       application
> Message-ID: <501179FB.2080209 at apc.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> *Facts Regarding the African Union Commission (.Africa) application *
>
> **
>
> 1.The African Union Commission's (AUC) involvement in the dotAfrica
> (.Africa) Top Level Domain (TLD) process has been mandated by African
> Heads of State (OR Tambo Declaration) and African Minister's in charge
> of ICT (Abuja Declaration).
>
> 2.In fulfilling its mandate the AUC has, in accordance with an open and
> transparent Request for Proposal (RFP) process, officially endorsed
> UniForum SA t/a the ZA Central Registry (ZACR) to apply for and launch
> the dotAfrica (.Africa) TLD.
>
> 3.The AUC/ZACR, in accordance with the procedures and standards
> prescribed by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
> (ICANN), has officially lodged an application with ICANN for the
> delegation of the (.Africa), under reference number: 1-1243-89583. This
> application constitutes the official AUC endorsed application for the
> dotAfrica (.Africa) Top Level Domain. Further details of this official
> application is available
> at:
> http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/1184
>
>
> 4.There is a competing private application, for a confusingly similar
> string, lodged by DotConnectAfrica Trust. The application for the
> dotdotAfrica (.dotAfrica) TLD string, under reference number 1-1165-42560.
>
> 5.The AUC/ZACR's application meets and exceeds, the minimum evaluation
> criteria set by ICANN for application of Geographic strings.
>
> 6.The AUC/ZACR's application, is correctly designated as a geographic
> application in accordance with the criteria and processes outlined in
> ICANN's Applicant Guidebook.
>
> In particular:/Africa (and therefore .Africa) is a clearly designated
> geographic area as defined in the UNESCO "Composition of macro
> geographical (continental) regions, geographical sub-regions, and
> selected economic and other groupings" list
> (http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm)./Therefore the
> designation of the official dotAfrica (.Africa) TLD string application,
> as a geographic name, is technically and procedurally correct. The
> "geographic evaluation process" that this application is subject to
> provides sufficient checks and balances for the protection of interests
> and rights of African governments and the pan-African community.//
>
> 7.The AUC endorsed dotAfrica (.Africa) application has been, and
> continues to be, a collaborative African initiative involving African
> governments, ICT stakeholders and the broader African community.
>
> In this regard the stated mission and objective of the AUC's officially
> endorsed application is enshrined in its answers to question 18 of the
> Application, which is publicly available on the ICANN New gTLD website
>
> http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/1184
>
> --
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20120726/5bfddb21/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of kictanet Digest, Vol 62, Issue 127
> *****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20120730/eeeb1184/attachment.htm>