AT-LARGE GATEWAY

At-Large Website

ALAC

RALOs

At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)

At-Large Governance

At-Large Reports

Policy Comments & Advice

Working Groups

ICANN Meetings

At-Large Summit (ATLAS III)

At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development

ALAC and RALO Elections, Selections, and Appointments

At-Large Priority Activities - 2022

Tijani BEN JEMAA

ALAC is in charge of the certification of the ALSes under the recommendation of the RALOs. It is also in charge of the decertification of the ALSes that don’t comply with the membership requirements also under the RALOs recommendation.

Since AFRALO is supposed to give its recommendation for the decertification if any, we must set up the guidelines regarding the decertification of ALSes

What are the possible reasons of decertification:

  • We have certain ALSes that didn’t show-up since a while. 
  • These are the main candidate foe decertification:
    • The ALS is in hibernation mode or don’t exist any more
    • The ALS is not interested anymore in AFRALO 


For the record, NARALO and APRALO have already recommended the decertification of some ALSes

  • Some proposals of parameters for decertification:
    • An ALS that has been in a "Standby" status for one entire year, and didn't give valid reasons for that situation should be considered for decertification
    • Before proceeding in the decertification process, the RALO Chair or another designated RALO member officially contacts the ALS representatives for a last trial (with the AFRALO list in copy) to bring it back to the RALO activities.
    • If, 6 months after the trial, the ALS didn't improve and didn't give convincing reasons for their silence, The RALO should proceed and propose to ALAC the decertification of the ALS.
    • All the above is applicable to individual members.    
  • Process:
    • An ALS in a "Standby" Status is contacted by the RALO Chair to understand why it is not active
    • During one year, this interaction with the ALS representatives shall continue to bring the ALS back to the RALO activities
    • If, despite all those efforts, the ALS didn't give any sign of improvement, a final warning is sent to the ALS (with the AFRALO list in copy) informing them that the decertification will happen in 6 months if no improvement is made. 
    • In summary, once an ALS reaches the "standby" status, it will spend a year in interaction with the RALO chair for reactivation. if not successful, the ALS will be decertified 6 months later

All the above is applicable to individual members.

New ! AFRALO Decertification Rules 2018 DRAFT



  • No labels

8 Comments

  1. Baudouin Schombe

    I support these disciplinary measures. It is time for us to become aware of our voluntary commitments to be part of this community.

    I also feel challenged and I am committed to being more and more active and present in the working groups and in our virtual spaces of work.

  2. Seun Ojedeji

    Does the 1/3 for meeting includes those who have tendered apology and does the 50% for decision making includes those who have appointed another ALS to cast their vote or cast their vote prior to the formal meeting. If no in both cases, I will suggest it be the case.

     

    May I ask staff to provide us with ALS attendance statistics to AFRALO monthly meeting in the last 6 months?

     

    By the way do we have a process for ALSes to appoint another ALS as one-time rep? If no I think we may need that going forward as well. Regards

  3. Daniel Khauka Nanghaka

    This is an important measure because the dormant ALSes just act as a statistics and it becomes challenging for decision making and budgeting purposes. I believe we should have a call to discuss this and come into consensus. Seun Ojedeji I agree, staff to provide ALS attendance statistics which will guide on the decertification of the ALSes. 

  4. Seun Ojedeji

    Hello,

    I am looking at the new text above and it seem something about 1/3 of votes is not longer there(as per my previous comment). In anycase, i think this process of decertification seem fine to me (while still noting my reservation about the reports required in the threshold). I will suggest that we include details of the various means of contacting that would have been attempted before further action is taken; Such means should include but not limited to email, telephone phone calls, reach out through other ALS within the same country, ALS website contact, contact address posting etc.

    I will also like to add that the last warning where the 6months decertification gets triggered should be sent to the ALS with the AFRALO list in copy.

    Regards

    1. Baudouin Schombe

      I say yes to all the contact arrangements can be envisaged to reassure that the Als concerned by the process of decertification has been sufficiently informed.
      However, it would also be logical for a factual report to be drawn up and submitted to the appreciation of all members of Afralo, specifying the measures taken. This report of fact must be sent to the AlS concerned while demanding an acknowledgment of receipt.
      If the AlS persists and does not acknowledge the receipt of this decision, it is up to the General Assembly to take the final decision.

  5. Philip F Johnson

    Quorum of Members

    The review of the Rule of Procedure of AFRALO is very significant since its Membership has grown over a period of time. Therefore, we should specify the number of Members at a meeting that constitute the quorum and that number should be the largest number that can be depended on to attend any meeting,  However, it has been noted that it is often not possible to obtain the attendance of the majority of the Membership at meetings. It is therefore very important to have a provision in our Rule of Procedures for a relatively small quorum, For me, actually number can be listed, or a percentage of the Membership can be specified, The quorum should be a small enough number to permit the business of AFRALO to proceed, but large enough to prevent a small minority from abusing the right of the majority of the members by passing motions that do not represent the thinking of the majority, 

     

    1. Baudouin Schombe

      Hello Johnson,

      Can you redirect this comment in the site concerning the quorum?  We risk losing the thread of trade.

      friendly

       

  6. Philip F Johnson

    Quorum of Members

    The review of the Rule of Procedure of AFRALO is very significant since its Membership has grown over a period of time. Therefore, we should specify the number of Members at a meeting that constitute the quorum and that number should be the largest number that can be depended on to attend any meeting,  However, it has been noted that it is often not possible to obtain the attendance of the majority of the Membership at meetings. It is therefore very important to have a provision in our Rule of Procedures for a relatively small quorum, For me, an actual number can be listed, or a percentage of the Membership can be specified, The quorum should be a small enough number to permit the business of AFRALO to proceed, but large enough to prevent a small minority from abusing the right of the majority of the members by passing motions that do not represent the thinking of the majority,