Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress

    • To: Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at japan-telecom dot com>
    • Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress
    • From: MAEMURA Akinori <maem at nic dot ad dot jp>
    • Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 10:07:18 +0900
    • Cc: apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net
    • Delivered-to: apnic-talk at mailman dot apnic dot net
    • In-reply-to: <CF50E9B7.86A67%myamanis at japan-telecom dot com>
    • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apnic-talk/>
    • List-help: <mailto:apnic-talk-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
    • List-id: General discussions on APNIC <apnic-talk.lists.apnic.net>
    • List-post: <mailto:apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net>
    • List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk>, <mailto:apnic-talk-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
    • List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/apnic-talk>, <mailto:apnic-talk-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
    • References: <CF48EE5A.85B79%myamanis@japan-telecom.com> <365C33CF-B77B-40CA-88B5-53746928444D@apnic.net> <5323ECC9.3030609@cis-india.org> <CF4CC73D.85D7D%myamanis@japan-telecom.com> <201403191612.GIE89288.BNFN@nic.ad.jp> <CF50E9B7.86A67%myamanis@japan-telecom.com>
      • 
        
        (2014/03/21 11:18), Masato Yamanishi wrote:
        > Maemura-san and EC members,
        >
        > Thank you for sharing EC's view.
        > Let me quote your statement in slightly different order to make my comment.
        >
        >> Technically speaking on the basis of our governing provisions,
        >> the Executive Council has function to act on behalf of the Members
        >> in the interval between AGMs, and to manage the activities, functions
        >> and affairs of APNIC.
        >>
        >> More practically, the EC represents the Membership to manage APNIC's
        >> activity,
        >> and need to comply the will of the Membership, sometimes with the
        >> broader community.
        >>
        >> We have the power to authorise the activity by DG and Secretariat for
        >> the Membership,
        >> but need to synchronise our thought on the authorization with the
        >> Membership.
        >>
        >> That is why we set a timeslot to discuss the Internet Governance issue
        >> in the AMM this time,
        >> after we announced our support for Montevideo Statement in January.
        >
        > It complies with APNIC by-laws 30, so I don't see any problem from
        > procedure perspective.
        Yes, as you see the wording in my message was in accordance with it.
        
        > BUT,
        >
        >> Montevideo Statement was crafted among the I* CEOs in the situation, as
        >> Tony has already told,
        >> with very limited time allowance with very quick moves at that time,
        >> and so was the I*'s reaction to NTIA statement.
        >
        >
        > Do you mean that DG had signed it before consulting EC nor members as
        > there was not enough time?
        > Does it comply with APNIC by-laws 54? It says;
        I am sure he has been in full touch with the EC to proceed these issues and signed them under the EC's authorization.
        
        Akinori
        > 54. The main functions of the Director General are:
        >   a. to act as the chief executive officer of APNIC and the corporation;
        >   b. to have, subject to the provisions of these by-laws and to the
        > direction of the Executive Council, the responsibility for the general
        > management and control of the activities, functions and affairs of APNIC
        > and the corporation and shall perform all duties and have all powers which
        > are commonly incident to the office of chief executive or which are
        > delegated by the Executive Council;
        >   c. to execute all contracts, agreements and other instruments of the
        > corporation which are authorised including affixing the Seal of the
        > corporation;
        >   d. to appoint and have general supervision and direction of all of the
        > other staff and agents of APNIC and the corporation, including but not
        > limited to bookkeeping, accounting and treasury functions on behalf of the
        > Treasurer;
        >   e. to implement strategic policies, prepare plans for APNIC, and shall
        > coordinate its activities, functions and affairs;
        >   f. to report to the Executive Council and to put forward resolutions for
        > the consideration of the Executive Council;
        >   g. to take all the actions required to ensure the economic use of
        > APNIC's resources and shall be responsible to the Executive Council for
        > all the administrative and financial aspects of APNIC's activities;
        >   h. to act as the legal representative of APNIC and the corporation;
        >   i. to act as an ex-officio member of the Executive Council.
        >
        >
        > Rgs,
        > Masato Yamanishi
        >
        >
        > On 14/03/19 0:12, "MAEMURA Akinori" <maem at nic dot ad dot jp> wrote:
        >
        >> Dear Masato, Pranesh and everyone,
        >>
        >> I know this is very late response for your request for the EC to clarify.
        >> Apologies.
        >>
        >> At Mon, 17 Mar 2014 15:41:35 -0700
        >> In message <CF4CC73D.85D7D%myamanis at japan-telecom dot com>
        >>   "Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress"
        >>   "Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at japan-telecom dot com>" wrote:
        >>
        >> | Pranesh and All,
        >> | 
        >> | While I'm not new to APNIC, I have same question/concern.
        >> | Can EC clarify it?
        >> | 
        >>
        >> Montevideo Statement was crafted among the I* CEOs in the situation, as
        >> Tony has already told, with very limited time allowance with very quick
        >> moves at that time, and so was the I*'s reaction to NTIA statement.
        >>
        >> Technically speaking on the basis of our governing provisions, the
        >> Executive Council has function to act on behalf of the Members in the
        >> interval between AGMs, and to manage the activities, functions and
        >> affairs of APNIC.
        >>
        >> More practically, the EC represents the Membership to manage APNIC's
        >> activity, and need to comply the will of the Membership, sometimes with
        >> the broader community.
        >>
        >> We have the power to authorise the activity by DG and Secretariat for the
        >> Membership, but need to synchronise our thought on the authorization with
        >> the Membership.
        >>
        >> That is why we set a timeslot to discuss the Internet Governance issue in
        >> the AMM this time, after we announced our support for Montevideo
        >> Statement in January.
        >>
        >> It was great to see very active discussion there, and that it triggered
        >> the continued discussion on line.
        >>
        >>
        >> As Masato points out, now Paul is more engaged in the activity of
        >> coordination among our fellow organizations and ITU arena, which is based
        >> on the EC's authorization.  We authorize becuase we think it needed.
        >>
        >> I understand it looks like politics game with little thing, if not
        >> nothing, to do with Members' own business.
        >>
        >> However from the viewpoint of a company whose business is serving
        >> community with Internet Resource, one of which is APNIC, it is really
        >> important to address the risk of unwanted non-viable arrangement and to
        >> have people with other stakes understand our position.
        >>
        >> Moreover, as already mentioned, the forthcoming couple of years are quite
        >> crucial stage for us to keep our healthy business environment.
        >>
        >> That's why we authorize these activities by Secretariat, and what we need
        >> to have you understand.
        >>
        >> As we have many things to come, Director General and the EC will have
        >> more communication each other to consider these actions, than we have
        >> already been doing.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> I know, through my own business, that how Internet Governance issues are
        >> difficult for people (e.g. of tech community) to realize,  I am still on
        >> the way to find how I can couple the issue we confront adequately with
        >> community's interest.
        >>
        >> The EC needs to have the Membership's support with well-informed consent,
        >> and of course we need to change our thought just in case we found it was
        >> not of the Membership and community, and I hope the current discussion
        >> will valuable for the purpose.
        >>
        >>
        >> Sincerely,
        >>
        >> MAEMURA Akinori, my own hat on, but I am sure the EC well sheres these
        >> points
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> | Rgs,
        >> | Masato Yamanishi
        >> | 
        >> | 
        >> | 
        >> | On 14/03/14 23:01, "Pranesh Prakash" <pranesh at cis-india dot org> wrote:
        >> | 
        >> | >Tony Smith [2014-03-14 21:42]:
        >> | >> As I'm sure you appreciate, the news from the US has just arrived
        >> this
        >> | >>morning and a lot of the details are still coming to light. We're
        >> | >>planning to prepare something that explains what this development
        >> means
        >> | >>in more detail when more information is confirmed.
        >> | >
        >> | >I'm sorry, but I'm new to APNIC's lists.
        >> | >
        >> | >Was there any consultation within APNIC before APNIC's leader's name
        >> was
        >> | >added to this statement?  Could you also point me towards the community
        >> | >consultation / mailing list discussions that took place before the
        >> | >Montevideo Declaration was signed as something APNIC endorsed?
        >> | >
        >> | >> But for now, we wanted to alert everyone to this news and the fact
        >> | >>consultation will begin in our region in Singapore.
        >> | >
        >> | >Could you outline the intra-APNIC consultations (i.e., not the ICANN
        >> | >consultations about which ICANN's published a document) that will take
        >> | >place with regard to this?  Which mailing list will these discussions
        >> be
        >> | >directed towards?
        >> | >
        >> | >-- 
        >> | >Pranesh Prakash
        >> | >Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
        >> | >T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org
        >> | >-------------------
        >> | >Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law
        >> School
        >> | >M: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org
        >> | >PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash
        >> | >
        >> | 
        >> | 
        >> | _______________________________________________
        >> | apnic-talk mailing list
        >> | apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net
        >> | http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
        >> | 
        >