[Ncsg-discuss] Is ICANN helping to subvert its own governance model?

Sun Nov 16 18:19:28 EET 2025

Anriette,
Thanks for your comments. I think your question about the relationship between the African Union and Smart Africa (SA) is an important one to pursue. It is relevant if SA succeeds in establishing some kind of Council (CAIGA) that has supervisory authority over AFRINIC. I think that is a bad idea and I also think it is highly unlikely. But as a partner of SA, ICANN needs to confront this question.

As for "generalizations about the region and its governments," sorry if you read that into the article. No such generalizations were intended. Your misinterpretation shows that nationalism and identity politics are big obstacles to clear thinking about Internet governance, especially in this case. There is no statement anywhere in that blog, or in anything I have ever written, that says Africa is "inherently" unstable or undemocratic. Inherent means "existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute." No, the article merely calls attention to the fact that many of its current governments are undemocratic or unstable, which is a fact. Some African governments are not unstable or undemocratic, and there is certainly long term hope that stability and liberal democracy will come to additional African states.

The point is, all these governments would be part of a board that wants to govern AFRINIC. So what kind of principles and policies would ensue? Geopolitics and national interests are "inherent" features of multilateral, government institutions. That is my argument, and it applies to all regions, not just Africa.

The article advocates for self-governance of AFRINIC by its members, and opposes an overlay of state-directed control. This is what we mean by "the multistakeholder model," is it not? My rejection of state control and digital sovereignty applies to the U.S. government, to European governments, etc. Our current experience with the Trump administration and its nationalistic, nativist, sovereigntist policies is an excellent example of why I don't want states setting policies for the global coordination of Internet identifiers. It also explains why I was and remain a big advocate of eliminating U.S. control of ICANN during the 2014-2016 transition. I think I have been perfectly consistent about this.

Dr. Milton L Mueller

Georgia Institute of Technology

Carter School of Public Policy

[cid:853c9b57-4044-46f8-b1a9-5d17aae17069]<https://internetgovernance.org>

________________________________
From: Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2025 10:44 AM
To: Mueller, Milton L <milton at GATECH.EDU>; NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Subject: Re: Is ICANN helping to subvert its own governance model?

Dear Milton

You are often the person that asks tough questions in an uncompromising way. I like and value that about you even when I don't agree with you :) But speaking as an African I would appreciate it if you could do so without making generalisations about the region and its governments. Africa is not inherently 'unstable' or undemocratic, as you imply.  In fact, living in the US at present you probably have firsthand knowledge of how erratic states and their leaders can be and how risky it is to make assumptions about them.

>From my perspective as someone who has tried to follow the process closely, but from a distance, I do have questions over and above those in the NCSG letter, but they can wait for a bit later and should be addressed to the AfriNIC board and to Smart Africa and the  African Union.

For example, does the MOU between Smart Africa and the African Union Commission include commitment to comply with the AU's Data Policy Framework<https://au.int/sites/default/files/documents/42078-doc-DATA-POLICY-FRAMEWORKS-2024-ENG-V2.pdf>, and the AU Declaration on Internet Governance <https://au.int/sites/default/files/newsevents/workingdocuments/33025-wd-african_declaration_on_internet_governance_en_0.pdf>  which affirms freedom of expression, openness and the WSIS  principles of multistakeholder participation? And, will Smart Africa int is interaction/support of AfriNIC adhere to  the African Commission on Human and People's Rights Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression<cid:part2.Naj000J0.A4kgHMma at apc.org>. The latter is a particularly strong document and shaped by multistakeholder consultation and in particular civil  society input.  AfriNIC has in the past been active in the formulation of AU internet-related policies.

I also have questions on how Smart Africa, which is indeed doing good work and filling a gap left by the lack of capacity at the African Union Commission, plans to work with civil society and promote and protect human rights in its digital governance work.  While Smart Africa does not exclude civil society, it does seem to practice its multistakeholder approach primarily through working with the private sector. AfriNIC also always needed to strengthen its connections with civil society. I hope  that new board will help make that happen.

These are not questions for ICANN but I think they are questions relevant to many NCSG members involved in internet governance in Africa (and beyond).   Emmanuel and others, if you do have some of the answers to my questions, please share.

Thanks

Anriette

Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette at apc.org//anriette at gmail.com<mailto:anriette at apc.org//anriette at gmail.com>

On 2025/11/14 17:50, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
I support the letter 100%

________________________________
From: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com><mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2025 1:55 AM
To: NCSG <ncsg-discuss at listserv.syr.edu><mailto:ncsg-discuss at listserv.syr.edu>; ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is><mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
Cc: Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu><mailto:milton at gatech.edu>
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Is ICANN helping to subvert its own governance model?

hi all,

thanks for the comments and input to letter, here the new version after resolving the changes https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPgRLILaCtsda8YRA4mUtElLXYS6udjF8cHvTo2AXHI/edit?tab=t.0 .
If there is no strong objection or concern, we can send this letter asap to the board for consideration, hopefully by the end of the day.

Best,

Rafik

Le jeu. 13 nov. 2025 à 23:08, Mueller, Milton L <00001d75540da649-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu<mailto:00001d75540da649-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu>> a écrit :

> I want to urge NCSG members that as we ask for more information, we do so without undermining AfriNIC's new board
> and the efforts of this board and those working with it to stabilise AfriNIC. They need our support.

Absolutely correct. The focus should be on CAIGA proposal, which deviates from multistakeholder principles, the new Afrinic board has very little to do with that as far as I know.

Dr. Milton L Mueller

Georgia Institute of Technology

School of Public Policy

[cid:part1.TU0719aP.MX50poOU at apc.org]<https://internetgovernance.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20251116/89bfb207/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Outlook-ruvfuzec
Type: image/png
Size: 6749 bytes
Desc: Outlook-ruvfuzec
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20251116/89bfb207/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Outlook-xmoxcji0
Type: image/jpg
Size: 6749 bytes
Desc: Outlook-xmoxcji0
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20251116/89bfb207/attachment.jpg>