No Campaign .africa

“No Campaign DotAfrica” was a concentrated e-mail-based protest effort that was undertaken by the Yes2DotAfrica campaign, an initiative of the DotConnectAfrica Organization (DCA) ostensibly to counter the perceived threat posed to DCA’s standing and prospective application to ICANN for the new DotAfrica generic Top Level Domain (gTLD).

The “No Campaign DotAfrica” cause commotion and ran from 2010 and peaked in 2011, when DCA circulated many No Campaigns to its readers.

Why the NO Campaigns

According to the justification issued by the company, the ‘No Campaigns’ were further used by the DCA to help shed more light on the opaque activities and shifting tactics of detractors that might not be readily transparent to those who have been following the DotAfrica debate, to expose the acts of illegality, and other conflicting interests of the detractors of DCA, and show that they are not suited to lead, or be engaged in the DotAfrica project. ^[1]

Most observers praised DCA for its commitment to transparency which was evident in the content of the No Campaigns, as can be read from the comments received from various individuals. ^[2] Other persons also criticized DCA for running a negative campaign and for naming names (mentioning the names of certain individuals) in its email circulations. Because of such criticisms, the DCA was forced on several occasions to defend itself and explain why it had to embark on the No Campaign by issuing clarifications. ^[3]

History on NO Campaigns

The No campaigns were first used by the organization to raise awareness to misleading information pertaining to the process of obtaining the first ever African top level domain. ‘No Campaign’, is an obverse to the “Yes2dotAfrica Campaign”. DCA’s involvement in the ‘No Campaigns’ as follows: When DotConnectAfrica started the .africa journey they did not foresee the adverse

effect on their yes to dotafrica campaign work by detractors who, if left unchecked would torpedo the DotAfrica dream.

Say “No” to the DotAfrica CABAL: 06 September 2011

This was evident after they had won the pivotal AU endorsement, the willful sabotage of these efforts foisted an ‘underground cold war’ of attrition on DCA, thus forcing DCA to fight in self-defense and respond to issues where it is either a named party or as a sidelined interlocutor. The issues included but not limited to misrepresentation of DCA’s mission and purpose, its principals and stakeholder communities, misinformation to the public on the implementation of DotAfrica and its merit, and efforts to counter mass media manipulation.

Yes2dotAfrica Campaign says “NO” to African Union RFP

DotConnectAfrica also wrote this no campaign to prevent an “Outsourcing” DotAfrica through an AU-sponsored RFP. DotConnectAfrica felt that the issuance of this RFP, was a clear official deviation from the earlier position contained in the ‘Briefing Note on DotAfrica’. Since the Africa Union no longer intended to apply directly for DotAfrica, it simply decided instituting an unnecessary and illegal RFP that would lead to the selection of a Consortium that the AU will outsource DotAfrica to, whilst retaining policy oversight process to enable it choose a partner that will apply for DotAfrica. DotConnectAfrica declined to participate in the Africa union RFP and instead applied for .africa on its own. ^[4]

Say “NO” to the ARC: The Illegitimate ‘African Agenda’ for Dakar

During the ICANN 42nd Meeting held from 23rd to 28th October 20 11 in Dakar Senegal, there was an ‘African Ministerial Round-Table’ meeting that was organized as a preICANN organized from the 19th to 21st October 2011supposedly to generate an ‘African Agenda’ as a resolution that will be presented as an input to the official ICANN 42 Meeting. However What DotConnectAfrica found to be suspect and worrying about theextra-ordinary meeting of experts was the role being played by Mr. Pierre Dandjinou and the nexus that has been established between Monsieur Dandjinou and the newly formed African Registry Consortium (ARC) with an avowed diabolical intention of hijacking DotAfrica.

This became an early warning of the expected results of the meeting that resulted in the communiqué to ICANN for the reservation of .africa related names that was later rejected ^[5]

Say “NO” to the ARC-African Registry: The Leopard Cannot Change its Spots

DCA started this awareness about the African Union introduction of an Expression of Interest to run .africa. The Communiqué was issued to clarify its position on DotAfrica stated that it will float an Expression of Interest process to short-list bidders to be endorsed for DotAfrica, and as of Week 20 of 2011 . This was regarded an unnecessary effort and it was also evident that the EOI process had been discredited and considered a step to officially hijack the DotAfrica Initiative using supposititious African Union official machinery also termed ‘AU-led’-process, to favour AfTLD. ^[6]

Say “No” to African Registry Consortium (ARC) The Leopard cannot change its spot

Say “NO” to the CABAL (special-interest coalitions) that is trying to hijack DotAfrica!

Since DotConnectAfrica (DCA) proposed the DotAfrica Initiative and commenced an active global promotional campaign which resulted in winning key endorsements mostly notably from the African Union (AU) Commission in 2009; DCA had to expose and fight numerous detractors and opponents, who, in their adversarial posturing, constitute a motley crew of strange bed-fellows that DCA now has to confront – unfortunately! In this no campaign DCA noted that these groups were so related to one another; had never proposed the DotAfrica Initiative not expended any effor in promoting it, but wanted to take over the dotAfrica initiative. ^[7]

Yes2dotAfrica Campaign says “NO” to African Union “EOI”

DCA started this awareness about the African Union introduction of an Expression of Interest to run .africa. The Communiqué was issued to clarify its position on DotAfrica stated that it will float an Expression of Interest process to short-list bidders to be endorsed for DotAfrica, and as of Week 20 of 2011 . This was regarded an unnecessary effort and also it was evident that the EOI process had been discredited, and considered a step to officially hijack the DotAfrica Initiative using supposititious African Union official machinery also termed ‘AU-led’-process, to favour AfTLD. ^[8]

Yes2dotAfrica says “NO” to Nii Quaynor, Vice Chair of AU dotafrica Taskforce

DotConnectAfrica wrote this campaign the effort of exposing the Activities of the ‘Real’ Dr. Nii Quaynor – Vice Chair of AU Taskforce and his unwholesome Activities regarding DotAfrica. Dr. Nii Quaynor had been found to be an unwholesome and a largely negative influence regarding the DotAfrica initiative. The campaign urged him to dissociate himself completely from anything to do with DotAfrica that included any proffering advice or consulting any organization or affiliating himself to any prospective bidder – whether eligible, real, or imaginary.^[9]

Yes2dotAfrica Campaign says “NO” to AfTLD

The African Top Level Domain Name (AfTLD) announced a press release few days before the ICANN 40 meeting asking “African Union” to get a mandate to run “.africa” registry. This was exposed by DotConnectAfrica as an equivalent to AfTLD attempting an illegal coup d’etat against DotConnectAfrica (DCA) efforts to run the .africa registry as the premier originator of the .africa project who had already been endorsed by African Union to DCA since 2009.

The reasons given were that AfTLD does not have the mandate to do “.africa” gTLD. They are associations of ccTLDs. ccTLD organization running a gTLD will mean stifling competition as there will be a Conflict of Interest in their mandates.^[10]

Vote “NO” for Pierre Dandjinou for ICANN Board

This was a November 2010 No campaign where DotConnectAfrica expressed its strong objection to Dandjinou’s nomination and appointment to ICANN Board seat no. 15, on 8 counts backed up by material sourced from websites, discussion groups and email exchanges. DCA wrote to the At Large Board Candidate Evaluation Committee (BCEC), on November 14, 2010 ^[11]

Rejoinders and Commentaries

DotConnectAfrica also featured rejoinders and rejoninders as clarifications to online reports that may have been inaccurate in giving information about .africa issues.

Say No to dotAfrica cabal - Chicken come home to roost — “NO” to the African Union RFP for the Operation of
DotAfrica

History of Rejoinders

DCA Trust wrote rejoinders as a form of clarifying erroneous or untrue reports on the .africa initiative and its related activities.

REJOINDER to IT Web South Africa: “New Local Domains See Breakthrough”

This was a rejoinder in response to an article ‘New local domains see breakthrough’ by itweb from South Africa that purported that the .africa domain was yet to be delegated following comments by Mr. Neil Dundas of UniForum ZA Central Registry that created a wrong impressions. DotConnectAfrica warned that despite the GAC comments, The battle for .Africa was not yet over. ^[12]

REJOINDER I to DomainIncite on “DCA Complaint Letter to U.S. Congress” and Uniforum/ZACR’s AUC Community endorsements

DotConnectAfrica was prompted to respond to the Domains blogger Mr. Kevin Murphy the Editor-in-Chief, Domainincite.com following his reports on the DCA’s Letter of Complaint to US Congress. This especially was to clarify on the proper matters and requested him avoid deliberately Obfuscating to confuse his readers, the rejoinder also stated that only ICANN can determine a qualified candidate to operate .africa and not the African Union. Also the rejoinder stated that UNIFORUM .africa application was not on behalf of African Community and that the United States Congress has complete jurisdiction over the entire new gTLD program by ICANN and was therefore the right body to ask to solve the controversies surrounding the .africa domain. ^[13]

REJOINDER II to DomainIncite on “DCA Complaint Letter to U.S. Congress” and Uniforum/ZACR’s AUC Community endorsements

DotConnectAfrica second rejoinder to Kevin Murphy in his blog’s agreement that “if UniForum did lie to the AU and other governments about submitting a Community application, it’s within the governments’ power to withdraw their endorsements.” It also warned him that he was not the spokesperson for UniForum, that the Presence of AU RFP Document does not Constitute Actual Proof of Tender process because it was similar to a rigged election process. The Reoinder also stated that DCA Trust would not accept a pay-off from UniForum because their petition to Congress is to ensure that UniForum is held actually accountable so that its deception can be fully uncovered, and the endorsement that it has received withdrawn because of fraud and illegality. ^[14]

REJOINDER to TechCentral South Africa: “Bizarre twist in .africa tale”

This was a clarification written to the author of an article on Tech Central South Africa written by Mr. Craig Wilson ^[15] stating that DotConnectAfrica had applied for the wrong string in which DCA responded stating that it had not applied for the wrong domain, further it expected ICANN to resolve the matter as soon as possible. The .dotafrica issue was changed as a result of an error on the ICANN TAS system. DCA also clarified that as gleaned from the published parts of the UniForum new gTLD application for .Africa, it is not a Community TLD application but a standard application for .africa.

We have applied for the 6-charcter ASCII string that references the geographic name ‘Africa’. The reveal by ICANN clearly indicates that DCA Trust has submitted an application for a geographic name.

The Dakar “Africa Agenda” Masquerade,ICANN 42: October 11, 2011

REJOINDER to DomainIncite: “DotConnectAfrica — disconnected from reality?”

This rejoinder and official response to Kevin Murphy’s article DotConnectAfrica — disconnected from reality? ^[16] which stated that the intention of DCA Trust to protect itself from becoming the victim or to suffer any harm from the insidious effects of the cuckoo-business model that UniForum SA (trading either as ZA Central Registry or Registry.Africa) is practicing.

The rejoinder also clarified that in the final analysis, ICANN, and not the AU has the pertinent rights over the DotAfrica gTLD ^[17]

REJOINDER to The Champion Daily: Misleading and Unfair Reportage on DotAfrica

DCA wrote to the Daily Champion Newspapers Ltd to ask the organization to seek clarify and offer factual reportage on the .africa gtld stories. DCA brought attention regarding stories relating to DotAfrica that had been reported by Mr. Remmy Nweke, a staff member in a biast manner in favour of those who continue to sabotage and oppose DCA’s efforts either by hook or crook on the DotAfrica issue. ^[18]

REJOINDER to ComputerWorld Kenya: “African Union” requests proposal for .africa registry”

DCA did a rejoinder to the article to bring out the inconsistencies on .africa domain name reporting stating that while the article aims to strike a certain balance regarding the positions of the contending parties on DotAfrica, DCA believes that the article should have amplified more, the genuine concerns that DCA has raised repeatedly concerning possible irregularities, conflict of interests, willful sabotage and unfair play and other large-scale illegalities that may have been committed. ^[19]

REJOINDER to ComputerWorld Kenya: AfTLD seeks mandate to manage .africa

DCA discussed African Unions involvement in the .Africa registry bids. DCA noted that it first expressed interest to ICANN and followed the process vigorously over several years and were not aware that the mandate for the management of the dotafrica registry is given by the AU. ICANN is the only governance authority that awards this mandate and this is done on a global scale and is not a regional or continental matter. ^[20]

REJOINDER to ComputerWorld Kenya: “African Union and the .Africa Debate”

DCA discussed African Unions involvement in the .Africa registry bids. DCA noted that it first expressed interest to ICANN and followed the process vigorously over several years and were not aware that the mandate for the management of the dotafrica registry is given by the AU. ICANN is the only governance authority that awards this mandate and this is done on a global scale and is not a regional or continental matter. ^[21]

Exclusive Commentaries

This is collection of several rejoinders that were written to clarify on specific concerns about the .africa domain progress.

History of Commentaries DCA used rejoinders and commentaries to offer clarifications and responses behind .africa initiative and its related activities, particularly focusing to those online media reports which DCA believed were manipulating public opinion.

DCA Commentary: Applicant Responses to GAC London Advice on .Africa

DotConnectAfrica made a response to the second GAC Advice that initially was issued during the ICANN GAC Meeting in Beijing China, and prior to that, there was a GAC Early Warning.

DCA noted that the ICANN 50 GAC Advice as well as other recent communications between the GAC and ICANN concerning the dispute over .africa, demonstrated both the African Union’s inappropriate efforts to determine the outcome of the applications for .africa and ICANN’s improper acquiescence to the GAC‘s demands. We strongly urge ICANN not to accept this advice. DCA also noted that the GAC‘s advice that ICANN should simply delegate .africa to ZACR once the IRP has been completed (regardless of what the Panel decides) is highly inappropriate. It assumes that the IRP concerning .africa is mere window dressing, an empty formality put in place so that ICANN can claim that it is meeting its obligations of transparency and accountability, but which will have no effect whatsoever on the presumptive delegation of .africa to the party favored by the GAC.

DCA deduced that based upon the discussions during ICANN 46 in Beijing and ICANN 50 in London, these new members, including the AUC, do not appear to have been educated by ICANN on the critical documents namely, the gTLD Applicant Guidebook, the ICANN Bylaws and the IRP process which is — by contract — the only independent method of review available to any applicant under the new gTLD program.^[22]^[23]^[24]^[25]

DCA Commentary on Alice Munyua: STOP Misrepresenting and Distorting Facts to the African

This campaign was written to clarify the issues that had been misrepresented by Alice Munyua on the non-Community TLD application by ZACR and informed as the official AUC-sponsored .AFRICA gTLD application for the African Community ^[26]

DCA Commentary: Applicant Responses to Beijing GAC Advice on .Africa

DCA objected to the Beijing GAC objection, their application received a GAC Objection advice which they submitted a response to the New gTLD Program Committee which subsequently gave recommendation that the GAC advice be followed. However the NGPC also gave the organization a channel through which they would appeal by seeking relief according to ICANN’s accountability mechanisms (see ICANN Bylaws, Articles IV and V) subject to the appropriate standing and procedural requirements.

DCA refused to back down even after the ICANN committees recommendations thereby they contacted the African Union as well as ICANN. DCA also requested for a Reconsideration which ICANN denied prompting that organization to begin the Independent Review Process which is currently proceeding.^[27]

DCA Commentary: Applicant Responses to GAC Early warnings on .Africa

DCA were given received 17 early warnings on November 21, 2012, these were among 240 individual GAC Early Warnings issued in relation to 200 new TLD applications which accounted for 162 unique strings. The warnings which when analyzed were noted to be of similar verbatim were received from African countries namely, Comoros, Kenya, Cameroun, DRC, Benin, Egypt; Gabon, Bourkina Faso, Ghana, Morocco, Mali, Uganda, Senegal, South Africa, Nigeria and Tanzania and the African Union.

In their December 12, 2012 response to the GAC early warnings, DotConnectAfrica noted that they believe that the governments were teleguided (or manipulated) into submitting these GAC Early Warning Advice, and as such, cannot really be considered as authentic in most cases. They added that It was simply the outcome of a coordinated action which African country governments are being coerced to support, and we believe that actual governmental consultations with respective African country governments has not been done in many cases.^[28]

DCA Exclusive Commentary: The “ICANN Africa Strategy” Is Not the Same as African Agenda

ICANN-45 International meeting of the ICANN Global Community in Toronto, Canada provided an opportunity for the unveiling of the initial draft of the ICANN Africa Strategy , this was expected that it would increase Africa’s visibility in ICANN, and in turn, also project ICANN’s visibility in Africa. Its implementation should lead to the mainstreaming of the principal issues of concern to Africa in ICANN’s discourse.

DCA Trust clarified that it was important that the ICANN Africa Strategy is not misrepresented in terms of its overall goals, and the type of strategic impact it is supposed to engender in the short to medium term.^[29]

DCA Exclusive Commentary:Press Statement on Sabotage to DCA Wikipedia Sites

DotConnectAfrica notified the public of an attempt to sabotage the companies’ efforts by a willfully and maliciously attack on the Wikipedia pages containing entries for : DotConnectAfrica^[30], .africa which was attributed based on DCA’s initial work^[31] and that of its Executive Director, Ms. Sophia Bekele^[32] which were reported to have been seriously affected by this act of sabotage. In the Wikipedia page damages, Crucial information pertaining to the work of DCA Trust, .africa and Ms. Sophia Bekele were willfully deleted from the published pages, even though the items of information that were removed have been unmodified and generally available on these pages for the past five (5) years. The pages also suffered misinformation where DCA opponents directly substituted their own .africa version and deleted relevant text, thus defacing the contents of the Wikipedia sites, including professional history and credentials of Ms.Sophia Bekele which had existed over five years. ^[33]

DCA Exclusive Commentary: Official Public Comments for the ICANN Evaluation Panel on the ZACR Application

DCA wrote these comments Pursuant to Section 1.1.2.3 (‘Comment Period’) of the new gTLD Applicant’s Guidebook that allows public comments to be posted on any submitted application during the Application Comment Period, DCA Trust had reviewed the public portions of the application for .AFRICA submitted by UniForum ZA Central Registry (Application ID: 1-1243-89583) and formally submitted certain comments on the posted application materials of UniForum during the public comments period of the new gTLD Program Time-Table. DCA Commented on the following issues:-^[34]

(1) Background Screening /Legal exposing: Manifest inconsistencies – Mission & Purpose, That the registry Oversight Role to Illegitimate Entity AUC; and also a Crooked Legal & Executive Responsibility.

(2) Geographic Name Evaluation Panel/ Endorsement: DCAanalysed the issues of UNIFORUM Endorsements and their inexistence and how AU Discouraged Competition for.Africa against the rules of fair competition. They also stated that the ZACR application was Not an African Community Application as had been promised by ZACR. They also found out that AU DotAfrica Taskforce Violated Ethics in the process for .Africa by ZACR.

(3) On Legal Rights which DCA stated that African Union (AU) Cannot Re-designate Registry Function and the existence

of an Illegal Contract between AU and UNIFORUM since AU Cannot appoint Registry Operator.

(4) On Financial Capability DCA said that ZACR provided an Understated Registry COI Amount (comment which was therefore “Not Enough for Critical Registry Function” as required before managing a top-level domain registry. DCA also complained about the Unit Selling Price of Domain Names, which was higher and not consistent. And finally, a Possible Conflict in the business model used by ZACR in proposing the .africa registry.

African Union & UNIFORUM SA should beware, Pride goeth before a fall: 05 March 2012

DCA Press Briefing: African Union & UNIFORUM SA should beware, Pride goeth before a fall.

DotConnectAfrica wrote the commentary as a informative analysis of the .Africa application controversies and press reports saying that they were quite misleading since a firm cannot be selected to administer a domain that has not yet been delegated. They also clarified the very impossibility of the African Union mainstreaming itself strategically within a particular proposal in a policy-oversight role whilst also playing the tactical role of a ‘self-endorsing’ entity in order to singularly control the fate of DotAfrica. The commentary stated that only ICANN can delegate a domain, they also challenged the African Union to act immediately in the greater interest of global public transparency and accountability, to release forthwith, the details of the EOI process and the RFP.^[35]

DCA’s Commentary on Story: Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves.africa, ITWebAfrica

DCA Trust was responding in this commentary to a published story written by Mr. Gareth Van Zyl article ‘The $185,000 dotafrica Internet domain name ‘misunderstanding’?’ ^[36] clarifiying that The attempt that is being made to position or characterize the application as the official African Community application that is sanctioned by the African Union Commission and about ’40’ African countries is a very egregious and fraudulent misrepresentation. Since it was not a community application to represent Africa. ^[37]

DCA Exclusive Commentary: A Moral Victory: ICANN response to AU

DCA trust wrote this commentary as a response to the ICANN’s Official Response to African Union on Request to Reserve DotAfrica Name who stated that “ICANN is not able to take actions that would go outside of the community-established and documented guideline of the program to provide the special treatment you have requested. ICANN does wish to explain, however that protections exist that will allow the African Union and its member states to play a prominent role in determining the outcome of any application for these top-level domain name strings.” This was taken to be a strong vindication for DCA’s strong opposition on reserving .africa related names. ^[38]

DCA Letter to ICANN: A Request for the Official Public Answer from ICANN to the Request made by the AUC to Include DotAfrica in the Top-Level Reserved Names List

Immediately after the Dakar Ministerial roundtable meeting that proposed for the reservation of .africa related names, DCA wrote a letter to ICANN to seek clarifications on the resolutions that had been made.

DCA said that We believe that if ICANN accedes to this extraordinary request by the African Union, this will automatically make the DotAfrica gTLD string unavailable, and could stop prospective applicants such as DCA from further participation in the process.^[39]

DCA Exclusive Commentary:Official response to the draft resolution of meeting of experts and the African Ministerial ROUND-Table in Dakar for the ‘African Agenda ICANN

DCA wrote the commentary to re-affirm its earlier position that the programme of the Dakar meeting agenda excluded many important stake-holders, which made it impossible for the voice and technical views of many organizations including DCA to be heard at the meeting(s). DCA also voiced the notion that it believed that this deliberate exclusion was pre-determined in a stage-managed fashion in order to produce a certain ‘rubber-stamped’ outcome by the meeting.^[40]

DCA Commentary: DCA’s Statement at the African Meeting on .Africa at Dakar

The ICANN meeting of October 2011 in Dakar had a precursor where there was a development of issues around the .africa domain that resulted in a ministerial communiqué that was opposed and eventually rejected by ICANN. DCA attended the meeting that was convened on Tuesday 25th October 2011 by the AU Task Force on DotAfrica to discuss proposals on DotAfrica and formulate a bid strategy on DotAfrica based on an agenda that they have already devised. As used this commentary to state its opinions on opposing the misconceptions raised by the conveners of the AfriCANN meeting.^[41]

DCA Commentary: ComputerWorld: AU requests proposals for .africa Registry

DCA Also wrote this commentary noting that article should have amplified more, the genuine concerns that DCA has raised repeatedly concerning possible irregularities, conflict of interests, willful sabotage and unfair play and other large-scale illegalities that may have been committed. .^[42]

DCA Commentary: “DCA Response to” AU “Briefing Note on DotAfrica”

DCA used this commentary to set the records straight and debunk some of their untruthful claims, whilst exposing their lack of proper knowledge regarding how the ICANN process works.

Say “No” to the DotAfrica CABAL:06 September 2011

DCA used this opportunity to set the records straight and debunk some of their untruthful claims, and also exposing the African Unions lack of proper knowledge regarding how the ICANN process works: The Response noted that “It is clear that the extraordinary process instituted by the AU Commission more or less usurps ICANN’s bidding process at the international level and could be interpreted as an attempt to blacklist the rest of the competition to the extent that it (the self-endorsing AU) wants to apply directly to ICANN and also choose the registry operator. Whereas the open international competitive bidding process regarding the DotAfrica gTLD is owned by ICANN, it is obvious that the AU now intends to take-over the entire process as a sort of supranational telecommunications regulator and Internet governance body for Africa. Perhaps the African Union might as well own and operate Air Afrique and become a participant in the airline business sector as well, since ‘Afrique’ refers to a named geography like DotAfrica.” ^[43]

DCA Commentary:”DCA” Response to the AU Commission Communiqué on DotAfrica

As a party that was specifically named in the said Communiqué, since its provenance is unknown, DCA feels compelled to exercise its right to reply, and also issue a clarification of its own. Moreover, the Communiqué is unsigned and no one really knows what process led to its release on the AU Web Site.

DCA felt VINDICATED that its concerted campaigns over the past couple of months led the AU Commission to now issue this clarification.^[44]

DCA Letter to AFRICA UNION: Request for an ‘Immediate Amendment’ of resolution on the recent Report Of The Experts Session Of The Extraordinary Conference Of African Union Ministers In Charge Of Communication And Information Technologies (CITMC) 2 -5 November 2009 , Johannesburg, South Africa

DotConnectAfrica, wrote and officially complained to the African Union in a letter written on 25 August 2009 over the AfriniC CEO Mr. Adiel A. Akplogan’s involvement with the African Union during the formative years of introduction of .Africa project by DCA to Africa Union. DCA said that “it did not feel that AfriNic could represent a neutral position towards its advice to the AU and that AfriNic does not have a mandate to get involved in ‘domain activities, as its mandate is strictly in ‘IP addressing”.

The letter was to provide clarifications in two matters to ensure that the African Union does not present a conflicting position as a result of the Consultant’s error and that the efforts of DotConnectAfrica does not get damaged by the consultant’s statement, which is allowing AfriNic to consult on behalf of AU to the Council of Ministers instead of DotConnectAfrica, which has already been given the mandate by AU to do so.^[45]

DCA Exclusive Commentary: A TRAVESTY – AFRICA Internet Governance Forum (AFIGF)

DCA attended the African Internet Governance Forum (AFIGF) inaugural meeting, held on 30 September 2011, in Nairobi, Kenya as an observer and expressed its acute concerns and overall dissatisfaction regarding how the AFIGF was organized with no input from national IGFs and regional IGFs. Also the ‘selection’ of a Chairperson as an outcome of the meeting wrongly implied the lack of the necessary quorum and lack of proper consensus on the organization and inauguration of an African Internet Governance Forum. DCA also noted that the lack of input from the supposed building blocks means that a bottom-up approach that is both inclusive, consultative, participatory and democratic was therefore not be followed, instead, an ‘agenda’ is now being imposed highhandedly on all those who may have an interest in Internet Governance in Africa but have not been given a voice in the entire process. DCA believes that people should be given a choice in a matter that affects them. ^[46]

Criticisms of the Campaign

The NO Campaigns which mostly achieved their intended purposes were seen as a new mode of effective strategies to raise attention to controversies that would otherwise not have been given notice by the Internet users.

Some people like Nii Quaynor claimed, however, that DCA has criticized everyone involved with .africa. However Nii is among those mentioned extensively in the No Campaigns as he played a key role on behalf of “dotafrica.org,”, a domain which he personally registered to pursue .africa as a ccTLD, before DCA came in the scene and campaigned for the .africa gTLD. The domain dotafrica.org is now used as the front face of ZACR Registry therefore evidencing that Quaynor fought to have dotafrica for himself.

Live Media coverage

Senegal TV Channel covering DCA’s complaints during Dakar Ministerial Roundtable. The video was produced at the ICANN 42 in June, 2012, in Senegal Dakar.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73]

[74]

This page preserves the ICANNWiki record of the No2DotAfrica Campaign.

DCA’s counter-campaign to protect the .africa initiative

against sabotage and institutional manipulation.

The Successful No2DotAfrica Campaign

ICANN Wiki Archive Below