Re: [apnic-talk] Election Reforms
Dear Rajesh, and all,
During its monthly meeting yesterday, the APNIC EC considered this matter;
and asked me to provide certain further details regarding the proxy and
voting records of the last EC election.
1. Acceptance of proxies in Kuala Lumpur
The EC decision on this matter, of 4 March 2010, is minuted and available
on the APNIC website at this location:
http://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/organization/structure/apnic-executive-council/ec-minutes
To quote from these minutes:
The EC noted that only one objection was received, and that only one
member organization appeared to have misunderstood the deadline as
announced. The EC further noted that the total number of otherwise valid
votes involved was approximately 46, being the votes of 6 members.
The EC reviewed the staff decision to reject the proxies lodged after 3
March 2010 09:00 UTC+8.
Using the electronic vote procedure, the EC confirmed the decision to
reject all proxies lodged after 3 March 2010 9:00 UTC+8. The Executive
Secretary recorded 4 votes in favour of this decision, and 4 abstentions.
The following EC members abstained from the vote: Akinori Maemura,
Che-Hoo Cheng, Ma Yan, and Paul Wilson.
2. Record of votes cast in Kuala Lumpur
According to normal practice, the public announcement of the election
result in KL included only the successful candidates, this being a measure
employed to "save face" for unsuccessful candidates. However in its
decision yesterday, the EC further directed me to reveal the total votes
received by all candidates, as recorded by the scrutineers of the election.
The complete voting record from the election was as follows:
Ma Yan 1253
Vinh Ngo 279
Maemura Akinori 1523
Ravi Shanker 750
Che-Hoo Cheng 1444
Jonny Martin 623
Additionally I would remind you that during its meeting of 10 March (whose
minutes are also available at the above URL), the EC resolved to commission
an independent inquiry into the events of the last election, and related
matters, which would produce a report before the next APNIC meeting (see
agenda item 3 from that meeting). This inquiry is now underway.
With regards,
Paul Wilson
Director General.
--On 12 June 2010 10:19:06 PM +0530 Rajesh Chharia <rc at cjnet4u dot com> wrote:
Dear Geoff,
While I appreciate the initiative to seek recommendations for conducting
future EC elections, it would be pertinent for the Community to know the
background of the last APNIC EC elections (KL).
It all started with wrong timelines for elections mentioned on the website
and my personal request to DG EC to correct the same as many members
had reposed faith in me to get their proxy votes registered.
I am pasting in trailing mail all the mails exchanged on March 3rd & 4th
which led to our having lost faith in the process. However, my
co-community
members didn't support till they also faced a challenge from the vested
quarter
when they proposed to observe the process of counting.
I must appreciate that you as Secretary after getting satisfied on
observer's legitimacy as non- voting member, duly supported the decision.
It was also gracious on part of the observer to withdraw from the counting
process.
I need to acknowledge here that the matured community didn't react
negatively and didn't ever expose the real abovesaid issue. Rather, they
proposed to correct it by moving the motion on election reforms within
APNIC
community. Their endurance should be praised that despite being alleged
for
all kind of reasons for proposing reforms, they didn't retaliate and today
when community has started seeing the view point, this panel proposal
comes
from your office.
I, as an optimist, would like to see the brighter side of this
thought/move
and suggest that the four points regarding election reforms should also
be a
part of this move. Pt. 1, about an "independent body" (not comprising of
ECs) to conduct the EC election can be viewed as this "Election Panel" for
conducting elections also in future.
Regards
Rajesh Chharia
-----Original Message-----
From: apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net
[mailto:apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of Executive
Secretary
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 8:05 AM
To: apnic-talk
Subject: [apnic-talk] APNIC EC Election Review Panel
________________________________________________________________________
APNIC EC Election Review Panel
________________________________________________________________________
The Executive Council of APNIC has recently established an independent
Election Review Panel. This has been done in order to examine this topic
with an independent and neutral perspective.
The members of the review panel are:
- Adiel Akplogan
- Save Vocea
- Philip Smith
The EC has appointed each of these individuals because they are well-known
members of the APNIC community who were present at the APNIC
29 Members Meeting, they are not associated with an organizational Member
of
APNIC, and they did not take part in the Executive Council election
process
in any way.
The brief of this Panel is to prepare a factual report of the events of
the
EC election in March 2010 and consider the following questions:
1. Were the election procedures followed?
2. Was the integrity of the election impaired in any manner? If
so, how?
3. To provide recommendations as to how the conduct of the EC
election process could be improved, as appropriate.
The purpose of this notice is to request community input to the review
panel, addressing the questions being considered by the panel.
Please address your response to this call for community input to:
exec-secretary at apnic dot net
We would appreciate it if you could ensure that you submit your response
before Monday, 5 July 2010.
The Election Review Panel will review the responses received from this
community input, the video recording of the meeting and the associated
transcripts, and the relevant APNIC corporate documents as part of its
brief. The Election Review Panel will submit its report to the APNIC
Executive Council.
Geoff Huston
Secretary to the APNIC Election Review Panel
On behalf of the Election Review Panel:
Adiel Akplogan, Save Vocea and Philip Smith
________________________________________________________________________
Geoff Houston exec-secretary at apnic dot net
Secretary to the APNIC EC
Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 2131 Milton, QLD 4064 Australia Fax: +61 7 3858 3199
Level 1, 33 Park Road, Milton, QLD http://www.apnic.net
________________________________________________________________________
* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
_______________________________________________
apnic-talk mailing list
apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
Mails exchanged on KL election issue:
From: Paul Wilson <pwilson at apnic dot net>
Date: 4 March 2010 10:10:50 AM GMT+05:30
To: Rajesh Chharia <rc at cjnet4u dot com>
Cc: Geoff Huston <gih at apnic dot net>
Subject: Re: Issue in Deadline
Dear Rajesh
I must convey to you the EC decision on this matter.
The APNIC EC has considered this question and decided that it is not
possible to extend the deadline for accepting proxy nominations, which
was established as per the announcement below. The reason is that such
an extension would disadvantage candidates and supporters who correctly
understood the deadline and ceased seeking proxy votes from that time
onwards.
I regret that the APNIC EC was not able to accommodate your request.
With best regards,
Paul Wilson.
Cc: Geoff Huston, Executive Secretary, APNIC EC
--On 3 March 2010 2:44:49 PM +0530 Rajesh Chharia <rc at cjnet4u dot com> wrote:
Dear Paul,
I appreciate your position.
I am also willing to listen to any specialist who can elaborate the
message of time line on the website. My concern is that how 12 people
(esteemed APNIC members) other than me can misunderstand the message,
which is explicitly referring to 9.00 UTC +8 (KL Time).
I am sure EC would be considerate to consider atleast 12 Proxies
forwarded before the confusion begun.
Thanking you and very sorry for any botheration.
Regards
Rajesh Chharia
+9198110 38188
On 03-Mar-10, at 2:21 PM, Paul Wilson wrote:
Hi Rajesh
The deadline as announced below was intended to be read as 9am today, KL
time.
I take it that you understood the announcement to mean a different local
time here in KL, and in this case I am very sorry about any ambiguity.
If you would please kindly explain your interpretation of the timezone,
then I will certainly report the matter to the APNIC EC and ask them for
a extension of the deadline.
Please understand that this is not a decision that I or Secretariat staff
can make.
Paul.
From: Rajesh Chharia [mailto:rc at cjnet4u dot com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 2:02 PM
To: Paul Wilson
Cc: Vivek Nigam; helpdesk at apnic dot net; N. Ravi Shanker; Naresh Ajwani;
Sunny Srinvas Chendi
Subject: Issue in Deadline
Dear Paul,
As per the information received just now saying that all the proxies
which I had submitted today well before 17.00 Hours KL time is being
rejected saying that it had crossed DEAD LINE.
Please refer to the guideline as mentioned on the web site it is as under:
Proxy voting
Only Corporate Contacts can appoint a proxy to vote at the meeting. Any
person may be authorized as a proxy for an APNIC Member by the Member’s
Corporate Contact.
Proxy voting closes on 3 March 2010 at 09:00 UTC+8 (KL time)
Please guide accordingly as w have more proxies to get registered well
before deadline time..
Regards
Rajesh Chharia
+9198110 38188
President
ISPAI (Internet Service Providers Association of India)
rc at cjnet4u dot com
CJ Online Private Limited
________________________________________________________________________
Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg at apnic dot net>
http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100
________________________________________________________________________
Join us for APNIC 30 Gold Coast. http://meetings.apnic.net/30