Comments and Questions by DCA Trust on .Africa at the ICANN-47 Public Forum, Durban SA

July 18, 2013 - PRLog -- This is a complete unabridged version of the comment/questions raised by Ms. Sophia Bekele, Executive Director/CEO, DotConnectAfrica Trust,at the ICANN-47 Public Forum Meeting - Durban, Republic of South Africa, 18th July 2013.  A shorter version was read out at the ICANN Public Forum Meeting on Thursday, July 18, 2013 due to constraint of time.

Background:
DotConnectAfrica Trust’s application for the .Africa generic Top-Level Domain name (Application ID: 1-1165-42560) received a GAC Objection Advice at the ICANN-46 Beijing Meeting in April 2013.

According to the GAC Beijing Communiqué( https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee) - now termed Beijing GAC Advice- (https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee), DCA Trust’s application received a ‘Consensus Advice’: that it was the consensus of the entire GAC that the .Africa new application submitted by DCA Trust should not be approved.  Since the Beijing GAC Advice was published on 11th April 2013, DCA Trust has continued to question the validity of the ‘GAC Consensus’ that led to the GAC Objection Advice against its application.

DCA Trust is aware that the Kenyan GAC Advisor, Mr. Sammy Buruchara had objected to the GAC Advice on its behalf and had sent an email memorandum to the GAC Secretariat with a copy to other recipients.  According to how GAC is expected to conduct it' official business, Principle 41, a member country can in fact put its objection in writing should they not be present at the meeting.  DCA had also amplified this in its written Response to the GAC Objection Advice. http://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/applicants/...

Amidst this climate of a questionable consensus, the GAC Objection Advice was accepted by the ICANN New gTLD Program Committee through its Resolution 2013.06.04.NG01.   The decision is already the subject of a reconsideration request. (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/governance/reconside...) that has been submitted by DCA Trust to the ICANN Board Governance Committee since June 19, 2013.

However, for the interest of accountability and transparency, DCA Trust is still looking for answers regarding how the consensus was reached by the ICANN GAC at Beijing to issue a GAC Objection Advice against its application.

Pertinent Questions:

I would draw the attention of  Ms. Heather Dryden, Chair of the ICANN GAC, ICANN Board Member, and  member of the New gTLD Program Committee to the following -

(1) An Email communication was written to you by Mr. Sammy Buruchara on 9th April 2013, stating that he was now “the newly appointed Kenya Government Advisor to the GAC”, and at the same time informing you that “should the situation arise, Kenya does not wish to have a GAC advice on DotConnect Africa Application for .africa delegation.”

(2) Why this written objection was not taken into account and advisement as clear indication that there was no consensus on the issue.  It appears you chose to ignore Kenya’s written objection – an action that has now resulted in a questionable GAC Objection Advice against DCA’s application for .Africa new gTLD.

(3) Clarify under whose auspices did Ms. Alice Munyua attended the Beijing GAC Meeting since we understand her accreditation as Kenya’s representative to the GAC expired at the ICANN-45 Toronto Meeting.  Furthermore, the above email communication from Mr. Sammy Buruchara also noted that: “It has come to my attention that Alice Munyua has introduced herself as the Kenya's gov representative to the GAC.  This is inform (sic) you that Kenya does not stand by what Alice states in the GAC since she ceased to be the Kenyan Government advisor for GAC on the day of my appointment.”

We would like to know why this important disclaimer on Mr. Alice Munyua as conveyed by Mr. Sammy Buruchara was ignored and how she was allowed to attend the Beijing GAC Meeting and contribute to deliberations on GAC Advice even though she was no longer accredited to the ICANN GAC. We would like to know how, as Chair of the GAC, you allowed this irregularity to occur.

(4) Finally, we would like to know under what accreditation is Ms. Munyua currently attending  the GAC meetings.

Thank you.