haahaaa, am not sure :-).
But I guess to me 'legitimate aims' may vary country by country.  But most 
countries would define these legitimate aims around the 'National Security' 
umbrella. Which ties into the second point - is it covered/prescribed in law?
So as long as the country has negotiated how and when to shut down their 
communication services/Internet, and  backed this up that in their Acts of 
parliament then  AfriNIC has no business getting involved, however crude that 
law maybe :-).
The last point 'necessary and proportionate' ensures that such shutdowns if 
they must happen are moderated in terms of duration, coverage or service type.
At the end of the day we can say most governments are never right when it comes 
to shutdowns, but that is not the same as assuming that Afrinic policies will 
always be right on internet shutdowns.  
There must be shared checks and balances often brokered by courts of law.

      From: Ali Hussein <a...@hussein.me.ke>
 To: Walubengo J <jw...@yahoo.com> 
Cc: Ish Sookun <ish@lsl.digital>; General Discussions of AFRINIC 
<community-discuss@afrinic.net>; rpd <r...@afrinic.net>
 Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 6:53 PM
 Subject: Re: [rpd] [Community-Discuss] Controversial anti-shutdown policy 
discussed at RIPE
What, pray is Legitimate Aim'? :-)
AliHusseinPrincipalHussein & Associates Tel: +254 713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassimSkype: abu-jomoLinkedIn: 
13th Floor , Delta Towers, Oracle Wing,Chiromo Road, Westlands,Nairobi, Kenya.
Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are purely mine 
and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the organizations that 
I work with.
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Walubengo J <jw...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Those lawyers dealing Internet rights suggest that Internet rights could be 
violated only if the following three conditions apply:
a) The shutdown must serve legitimate aimb) The shutdown is 
supported/established by (domestic or international) lawc) The shutdown is 
necessary and proportionate.

      From: Ali Hussein <a...@hussein.me.ke>
 To: Ish Sookun <ish@lsl.digital> 
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss@afrinic.net >; rpd 
 Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 11:06 AM
 Subject: Re: [rpd] [Community-Discuss] Controversial anti-shutdown policy 
discussed at RIPE
Protests are an expression of freedom of association and speech. Shutting down 
the Internet because people are protesting is unjustified. The very Governments 
that are elected by the people should be responsible to the people. I can see 
where in some extreme (really extreme) circumstances where shut downs maybe be 
necessary. However, mechanisms MUST be put in place from the onset to justify 
such. And this must be a Multi- Stakeholder Consensus Building Mechanism where 
NATIONAL SECURITY is truly in jeopardy. 

Ali HusseinPrincipalHussein & Associates+254 0713 601113 
Twitter: @AliHKassimSkype: abu-jomoLinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin. 
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a 
habit."  ~ Aristotle

Sent from my iPad
On 15 May 2017, at 9:37 AM, Ish Sookun <ish@lsl.digital> wrote:

Hi Ali,

On 14/05/17 19:43, Ali Hussein wrote:

I've been following this discourse for a few days and I'm getting the feeling 
that no one in the community is supporting a shut down right? 

I would not say no one is supporting a shutdown. The discussions on the
RPD list prompted that some found it justified for the government to
shut down the internet because of riots & protests. I am not saying
whether they are right or wrong, but merely citing what I read from the


Ish Sookun

______________________________ _________________
RPD mailing list
https://lists.afrinic.net/ mailman/listinfo/rpd


Community-Discuss mailing list

Reply via email to