Dear All,
I apologize for having missed your rejoinder to my mail.
Your first question regards the reason as to why the same principle has
been applied to the election for Seat 2
notwithstanding the fact that there were two candidates.
My response is that an election cannot be run on different principles.
In this particular election the option "none of the above " was
introduced for the first time and everyone was aware of this and it
applied to all the elections held on that day. The Election guidelines
were amended to acomodate this option.
Consequently this option has to be taken in consideration when
finalising the results.
Where there were two candidates. The options for voters were (1) yes for
candidate (1)-((2) yes for candidate 2-(3) yes for non of the above.Each
one is mutually exclusive.
Each score to be counted separately. The majority for either option wins
the day. One should not create a fictitious majority by adding votes
polled by (1) & (2) together. The real majority was to all intents and
purposes the option which polled the most votes. There is no need to
extrapolate or interpret.
Where there was one candidate there were two options- Yes for the single
candidate or yes for "non of the above"
My reference to Art 10.2 was based on the decision of the members
present at past AGMMs to have the option of rejecting a single
candidate or to give their approval to the single candidate, This has
occurred more than once.
Legal Counsel AFRINIC.
On 24/05/2018 21:11, Arnaud AMELINA wrote:
Dear CEO and Chairman
It looks like the Legal counsel has not responded to this query
bellow regarding this very important issue about the recently
concluded elections.
Could you kindly remind him?
Let us address this to a good conclusion in order to enforce the
respect of our rules and processes.
Regards
Arnaud
Le sam. 19 mai 2018 11:40, Omo Oaiya <omo.oa...@wacren.net
<mailto:omo.oa...@wacren.net>> a écrit :
Dear Legal Counsel,
Thanks for your input. Much appreciated.
Your statements reinforce the interpretation of section 9.2 of the
guidelines with the origin of the "none of the above" option in
the election process and how votes for this option are considered
in the case of one candidate running for election for a seat.
[Last bullet point]
Case in which the election becomes a "yes" or "no" vote for the
only candidate. This point is clear and accepted and the
objection is not for the results for seat 5 and 6.
What has not been clarified is how the same principle came to be
applied for the elections for seat 2 which had two candidates
running for the seat, one of whom got higher votes than the other,
with the total number of members casting votes in excess of those
opting out.
You also referred to art 10.2 of the constitution but did not
elaborate on the precedence that occurred that has become an
integral part of our guidelines. As precedence automatically
becomes part of the election guidelines, it is important that we
address issues which come up around the election with care and
unambiguously.
Can you be so kind to clarify?
Best wishes
Omo
PS: Grateful to listers to please keep this thread confined to
the subject.
On 17 May 2018 at 17:17, Ashok <as...@afrinic.net
<mailto:as...@afrinic.net>> wrote:
Dear Members and Community,
Mt views have been sought on the matter under reference.
Please find same hereunder.
On 17/05/2018 14:04, B
*_The Election Process and last AGMM._*
The appointment of Directors is carried out during an AGMM of
the Company –Art 13.1 of the constitution.
The election of the Directors is carried out in terms of Art
13.2 of the constitution which refers expressly to the
election process approved by the Board.
MoreoverArt 10.2 of the Constitution refers to precedent
applied during an AFRINIC election and which de facto become
part of the election guidelines.
The election processas it stands today is the one which was
applied duringthe elections held during the last AGMM without
any opposition.
This is what it provides:
*9.2 Paper Ballot on Election Day*
The voting conducted during the Annual General Members'
Meeting is carried out via paper ballots containing a list of
candidate names and a ballot number. Prior to the vote, all
members present or participants holding a proxy will be
requested to register and validate their membership status.
+ Voters should only vote for one candidate per
category/region. Each mark on a ballot paper
represents one vote. A ballot with more than one
mark per category/region will be considered
spoilt, and not be counted.
+ The ballot paper should provide voters with the
option to not vote for any candidate (a.k.a. "None
of the Above").
+ This will be a secret ballot election. An
inclusion of any personal data on the ballot paper
will invalidate the vote and will be counted as
spoilt.
+ Elections will be closed as soon as the last
member or proxy present in the meeting room casts
his/her vote. Candidates with the highest number
of votes in each category will be declared winners.
+ In the event of a tie for an open position, voting
for that position will be repeated (Only by paper
ballot) the same day until there is a winner.
+ All open positions shall be subject to an election
process even if there is only one candidate. In
that event, if the option [none of the above] got
more votes than the only candidate, then the seat
shall be considered vacant and the Board will be
requestedto apply provisions of the Bylaws to
temporarily fill the vacant seat
The last amendment of the election guidelines introduced the
voting option “ None of the Above”. –(Vide second bullet point
above.)Those voters who have cast their votes for “ None of
the Above” have done so in compliance with the
prevailingconstitution and these are thus valid votes. Every
voter was aware of the new option.
The election guidelines are clear as to what happens when the
“ None of the Above” option has a majority.- (Vide last bullet
point above.)
The election guidelines must be read as a whole and all the
provisions read together.
Legal Counsel –AFRINIC
17.05.2018
oubakar Barry wrote:
Hello Board and Legal Counsel,
Good that Omo spotted this.
It’s a matter of applying the board election process adopted
by the board according to section 13.2 of the bylaws.
https://afrinic.net/en/community/elections/bod-election/process
describes the process and section 9 spells out how to
interpret the results in the case there are more than one
candidate and in the case there is only one candidate. These
two cases are addressed separately and differently.
It’s important to hear from the Board and the Legal Counsel,
as the elections can be challenged.
Please advise.
Regards.
Boubakar
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:24 PM, Omo Oaiya
<omo.oa...@wacren.net <mailto:omo.oa...@wacren.net>> wrote:
Greetings All,
I am looking at the BoD election process and it seems to
me that the recent e-mail from the Board Chair seeking
nominations for vacant seats should not be extended to
Western Africa.
The particular clause I am referring to is in 9.2 -
https://afrinic.net/en/community/elections/bod-election/process
*
Elections will be closed as soon as the last member
or proxy present in the meeting room casts his/her
vote. Candidates with the highest number of votes in
each category will be declared winners
I see from the list for West Africa that the candidate
with the highest number of votes should have been
declared winner and this is Dr Ousmane Tessa. (btw, Dr
Adewale Adedokun needs his name spelt correctly)
*Western Africa - Seat 2*
Dr Adelawe Abedekon - 43
Dr Ousmane Moussa Tessa - 56
None of the above - 78
/Result: The seat is vacant/
The results from the other regions are valid and
supported by the following clause as they had one candidate.
o All open positions shall be subject to an
election process even if there is only one
candidate. In that event, if the option [none of
the above] got more votes than the only
candidate, then the seat shall be considered
vacant and the Board will be requested to apply
provisions of the Bylaws to temporarily fill the
vacant seat.
Can AfriNIC and the nomcom please clarify? We should
not deprive Dr Tessa of a rightful win …. especially in
the circumstances we find ourselves.
Omo
_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
<mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
_______________________________________________
Members-Discuss mailing list
members-disc...@afrinic.net <mailto:members-disc...@afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
