[kictanet] African Union Commission Communiqué on the declaration of the Independent Review Panel (IRP) in the matter between Dot Connect Africa (DCA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

[Alice Munyua]

*African Union Commission Communiqué on the declaration of the 
Independent Review Panel (IRP) in the matter between Dot Connect Africa 
(DCA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)*

The African Union Commission (AUC) is deeply concerned by the final 
declaration of the Independent Review Panel (IRP) in the matter between 
Dot Connect Africa (DCA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names 
and Numbers (ICANN).

The declaration raises serious questions on the role of governments in 
the ICANN multi stakeholder model and the broader Internet governance 
ecosystem as well as the effectiveness and reliability of government 
protection mechanisms as outlined in the new gTLD Applicants Guidebook

We reiterate and re-emphasize that African governments mandated the 
African Union Commission (AUC), through the Abuja Declaration to “set up 
the structure and modalities for the implementation of the dot Africa 
Top Level Domain”.  The AUC adopted an open and transparent process at 
the regional level through the Request for Proposals (RFP) and at the 
end of this process exclusively endorsed the application submitted by 
the ZA Central Registry (ZACR) for the. Africa Top Level Domain, dot 
Africa (.AFRICA)

Recalling that African governments raised concerns in the Dakar 
communiqué, regarding the protection of geographic names in the new gTLD 
program and ICANN assured African governments that there were adequate 
protections for geographic names, such as. AFRICA contained in the new 
gTLD Applicants Guidebook.

We note that in response to these assurances the AUC elected not to 
pursue previous requests to have the. AFRICA TLD string added to the 
reserve name list and through our endorsement of the ZACR application 
for the. AFRICA TLD, the AUC became an active participant in the new 
gTLD process. We participated in the formulation and adoption of the 
geographic name protection mechanisms as contained in the Applicant 
Guidebook. This set of rules, applicable to all new gTLD applicants and 
affected parties, was the result of a multi-stakeholder engagement 
process that was eventually adopted by ICANN.

We reiterate that the processes leading up to the establishment of the 
final Applicant Guidebook, and all material times thereafter, including 
during the application and evaluation periods, was open, transparent and 
provided several avenues for applicants to engage with individual 
African governments, the GAC and the ICANN board regarding any concerns 
raised. All new gTLD applicants would have and should have, been acutely 
aware of these considerations prior to submitting their applications.

We recall that African governments, individually and collectively 
through the mechanisms of the GAC, engaged with all reasonable means at 
their disposal, as outlined in the Applicants Guidebook, to:

·Submit public comments;

·Raise early warnings (which provided an opportunity for other 
applicants to engage in an open and transparent manner with the various 
governments regarding concerns expressed); and

·Issue GAC objections and GAC advice to the board.

We emphasize that GAC consensus advice contained in the 2013 Beijing 
communiqué was the culmination of a lengthy process of public engagement 
in order to provide fairness and transparency regarding governments 
concerns and objections relating to geographic name protections and to 
provide rationale to the board and ICANN community, including 
applicants, on future government related responses to new gTLD applications.

The Africa region, African Internet stakeholders, the ZACR and AUC are 
the unfortunate victims of a dysfunctional accountability process and an 
independent review panel that did not delve more deeply to understand 
the new gTLD process, the role of governments in that process and how 
the ICANN multi stakeholder model functions in general.

We note that while the IRP does not refute that governments, through the 
issuance of consensus GAC Advice, formally objected to the DCA 
application, the final declaration raises concerns about the role of 
government engagement in the ICANN multi stakeholder model and more 
broadly in the internet governance ecosystem.

The AUC endorsed ZACR dot Africa (.Africa) application has been, and 
continues to be, a collaborative African led initiative involving 
African governments, ICT stakeholders and the broader African community.


*Directorate of Information and Communication***

Directorate of Information and Communication***|***Information and 
Communication***| *African Union Commission

Tel: +251-11-5517700* |*Fax:* |* E-mail:**DIC at africa-union.org 
<mailto:DIC at africa-union.org>* | *Web:www.au.int

Addis Ababa* | *Ethiopia




On 01/08/2015 11:11, Barrack Otieno via kictanet wrote:
> Listers ,
>
> FYI
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim at gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2015 09:56:01 +0800
> Subject: [ALAC] John Jeffrey blog on .africa IRP
> To: ALAC Working List <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>,
> afri-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> Dear ALAC and AFRALO,
>
> Please find below a link to ICANN General Counsel's blog on the .africa IRP
> ruling.
>>
> https://www.icann.org/news/blog/africa-irp-declaration-clearing-up-some-facts
> Best regards,
>
> Rinalia
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20150801/d0000388/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Communique-dotAfrica-1.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 514416 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20150801/d0000388/attachment.pdf>