Hi Owen, On 5/28/19 9:13 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > Indeed, the one and only legitimate item on the agenda was then deferred > to the next meeting followed by, perhaps, the most absurd question and > most ridiculous answer in the entire set of minutes: > > “The Chair asked the Board whether there is a need to seek SM’s > consent before the public release of the Court Rulings.” > > > Let me get this straight… The Chair felt compelled to ask the board > whether or not they needed the consent of a single board member (which I > see no particular reason to ask this particular board member and there > is no explanation in the minutes) prior to the public release of a > document which is ALREADY PUBLIC? How can the board possibly do anything > before the public release of a document which was, by definition, > publicly released at the time the board received it?
I do not agree with your statement that this is an absurd question. In fact, I believe it is a legitimate requirement to have the person's consent before publishing any document that contains personal information about the person. AFRINIC Ltd being a registered company in Mauritius has to abide to the Data Protection Act [1] of Mauritius. In fact, on the same note, I notice that the privacy statement [2] of afrinic.net dates back to September 2015 and refers the Data Protection Act 2004 instead of the 2017's amended act. Regards, Ish Sookun [1] http://dataprotection.govmu.org/English/Publications/Documents/Act%20No.%2020%20-%20The%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202017.pdf [2] https://afrinic.net/privacy _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
