[Ncsg-discuss] Is ICANN helping to subvert its own governance model?
Anriette Esterhuysen
anriette at APC.ORG
Sun Nov 16 18:51:36 EET 2025
Oh.. and thanks a lot for deleting the original last paragraph :)
Anriette Esterhuysen -anriette at apc.org//anriette at gmail.com
On 2025/11/16 18:19, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>
> 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
>
> <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
> <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
>
> <https://internetgovernance.org>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20251116/476e29ab/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Outlook-xmoxcji0
Type: image/png
Size: 6749 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20251116/476e29ab/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Outlook-ruvfuzec
Type: image/png
Size: 6749 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20251116/476e29ab/attachment-0001.png>
More information about the Ncsg-discuss
mailing list