Review of Proposal for the
Management of
Nigeria
’s ccTLD (.ng)
By
Femi Oyesanya
yeyerolli1@aol.com
Date:
22 December 2004
The Nigerian CCTLD Working
Group finally submitted a joint proposal for the administration of the .ng Top
Level Country domain. Supposedly, the proposal is a
presentation of a standard framework by which the .ng ccTLD will be managed.
The .ng domain currently has
less than 2000 active registered domains, and having been plagued by incompetent
attention in the past, the proposal submitted by the .ng ccTLD Working Group
necessitates careful review. The review has the following
objectives in mind:
-
To examine if the
proposed structure represents the interest of the local
Nigerian Internet
community.
-
To examine that the
proposed organizational structure enables the .ng
Organization to conform
with ICANN’s Policies, as stipulated in the Memorandum of Understanding
signed between NITDA and ICANN and became effective
June 9, 2004
.
-
That the proposed
organizational structure meets directives expressed to NITDA by the Nigerian
President, Olusegun Obasanjo, on
January 16, 2004
.
-
To review that
the structural composition of the .ng
organization has taken
measures by which it will
enable domain registration growth in the .ng ccTLD.
1.0
Review of Nigerian Local Internet Community.
ICANN defines Local Internet
Community as: “the Internet industry and users and the
government and authorities of the state or territory with which the ccTLD is
associated. The definition of the Local Internet Community may vary from one
country/territory to another, and is essentially a matter for the community in a
given country/territory to decide. The definition of the Local Internet
Community should be documented, available for public inspection, and transparent
to the local community”
[1]
A list of “stakeholders”
submitted by the .ng Working Group consisted of representatives from the Federal
Government, State Government, Private Sector, Educational Institution, Computer
Associations, and Youth sector. It is well represented. However, nowhere in the
Proposal, did the Working Group define and document what actually constitutes
the Nigerian Local Internet Community. The Stakeholder list
submitted by the .ng Working Group is as follows:
1.
National Information Technology Development
Agency--Mr. Basil Udotai
2.
Nigerian Communications
Commission--------------------Mrs. Mary NmaUduma
3.
Nigeria
Computer
Society-------------------------------------Mr. Chris Nwannena
4.
Internet services Providers Association of
Nigeria--------Mr. Sunny Imudia & Mr. S. Afolayan
5.
Nigeria Internet
Group------------------------------------Mr. Emmanuel C. Ekuwem
6.
Computer Professionals Registration council of
Nigeria
---Mr. G.M.M Obi
7.
Council for Registration of Engineers in
Nigeria------------
8.
Nigerian Universities
Commission---------------------------- Mr. A Azubuike
9.
Nigeria
Society of Engineers------------------------------
----Mr. Titi Omo Ettu
10.
National Broadcasting
Commission----------------------------Mr. Yomi Bolarinwa
11.
Association of Telecommunications
Companies-------
12.
Federal Ministry of Science and
Technology----------- -----Mr. Faluyi J.B
13.
Federal Ministry of
Communications-------------------------Mr. Majekodunni O.O
14.
Federal Ministry of
Education----------------------------------Mr. I.S.Auta
15.
Federal Ministry of Information and National
Orientation-- Mrs. Ibukun Odusote
16.
The
Presidency------------------------------------------------ Mr. Tajudeen Oyawoye
17.
Bankers Committee of
Nigeria-------------------------------
18.
Civil Society
Organizations----------------------------------Development Information Network
19.
Youth
Groups-----------------------------------------------------Mr. Gbenga Sesan
20.
The
Media--------------------------------------------------------Mr. Everest
Amaefule
21.
Nigerian Information Technology Professionals
Association
22.
Representative of State
Government---------------------------Prof. I. S. Diso
The .ng Working group ought to
provide clear documented definition of what constitutes the Nigerian Local
Internet Community as clearly specified in ICANN’s definition.
2.0
Review of Nature of Institution
The .ng Working Group defines
the nature of the .ng institution as:
“Members agreed that the nature
of the .ng ccTLD Manager shall be: Non-governmental, not-for-profit, Private
sector-driven (especially in terms of operations), and an all inclusive
membership”
The proposed structure of the
.ng Organization as a Non-Profit and Non-Governmental entity ought to be
commended. The implication here, is the
renouncement of government
control in the affairs of the .ng Organization.
Nigerian Government controlled
bodies have typically been plagued by a history
of inefficiency.
The renouncement of governmental control might be the best model towards
archiving effective management of the .ng Organization.
Also, the pronouncement of the
.ng Organization as a non-profit entity, would inherently shield the
Organization from tax paying burdens.
1.3.
Review of Role of Government
The .ng Working Group, defines
the role of Government as; “Supervisory at best. Policy and
practice to be determined to the best extent possible by market-based
considerations; No controlling authority over the internal affairs of the
Manager"
In defining the “Role of
Government” as relates to the affairs of the .ng Organization, it appears that
there are contradictions with the section that defines “Nature of the
Institution”. The section addressing “Nature of the Institution” was defined as
“Non-Governmental”. In this case, the statement defining
the “Role of Government“, to include one of
“supervisory at best”, appears to contradict the purpose of
a Non-Governmental organization. One definition of
Non-Governmental Organization is: “an organization or group
of people working independent of any external control with specific objectives
and aims to fulfill tasks that are oriented to bring about desirable change in a
given community or area or situation.”[2]
Readers should note, that any
supervisory oversight imposed on the .ng Organization by the Nigerian
Government, defeats the purpose of structuring the
.ng Organization as a
Non-Governmental entity. Also, if the role of Government
includes, “no controlling authority over the internal affairs of the Manager”,
what then is the meaning of a supervisory role? The role of
government in the affairs of the .ng Organization ought to be non-existent.
1.4.
Review of Institutional Organization
The .ng Working Group defines
the composition of the Institutional Organization as:
“Members agreed on following organs and functions: General Assembly (Policy and
power base of organization), Board of Trustees (Advisory body shaping policies,
practice and programs), Executive Board (Termed electable positions), and
Management Committee day-to-day operations)”
The .ng Working Group appears
to have designated policy making authority to two separate bodies: A) A General
Assembly, B) A Board Of Trustee.
In most Organizations, it is
almost always the case, that the Board of Trustee or the Board of Directors are
solely given the responsibility of policy formation.
The decision to give policy
making authority to two bodies within the .ng Organization, does not appear to
designate a clear line of policy making authority within the
structure of the .ng Organization.
1.5 Review of
Technical and Administrative Functions
The .ng
ccTLD Working Group describes the Technical and Administrative functions as:
“Members agreed that all Technical and Administrative functions
and procedures shall be decided by the emerging NGO Manager (NIRA)”
In essence, since Technical and
Administrative functional responsibilities are the core functions of the .ng
Organization, it appears that rather than delegate procedural policy
responsibility to the .ng Manager, governing Policy and procedure
responsibilities ought to be carefully outlined in the bylaws of the
organization. Typically, organizational bylaws are defined as:
“rules adopted by a corporation of internal governance. Bylaws are
usually included in the articles of incorporation”
[3] . The
overall rules as it pertains to the internal Technical and Administrative
governance of the .ng Organization, ought to be defined in
the articles of Incorporation. Operational day-to-day
policy and procedure ought to be the responsibility of the
.ng Manager, not overall Technical and Administrative policies and procedures.
1.6 Review of Basic
Second Level Domain Name Hosting Guidelines
The .ng ccTLD Working Group
provides minimum guideline on 2nd level Domain re-delegation as
follows: “Given unstable power conditions in Nigeria =
applicant to show capacity to generate uninterrupted power INDEPENDENTLY,
Conditions such as those of ISPs may be mandated as
benchmarks, Bandwidth Capacity Utilization must be maximized
= for cost benefits, Commitments to provide discounted and
if possible free services to certain categories of user = Places of worship,
Schools, certain NGOs etc”
Here, the .ng Working Group
realizing the nature of erratic electricity supply in
Nigeria
requires 2nd level authorities to be able
to generate power independently.
This particular requirement is
a necessity. To become a Registration
Authority or Re-Delegated Domain Authority, the capability to generate
un-interrupted power supply,
is and ought to be an essential
standard in
Nigeria
.
However, the proposal went
further requiring that, “Conditions such as those of ISPs may be mandated as
benchmarks”. What conditions? This
particular requirement is arbitrary and might create adverse effects on
non-ISP’s that wish to become Registration Authorities. Registration
bodies ought to have compliance standards specific to their nature of service,
the Nigerian ISP ought not to be the yard stick that drives any standard.
1.7
Review of Domain Name Dispute Resolution
The .ng ccTLD Working Group
states its Dispute Resolution proposal as:
“Domain Name Dispute Resolution
Department = publication of DNDR Rules and coordination of dispute process.
Actual DNS Dispute Resolution Service Providers to be appointed by Manager under
conditions approved by the Board of Trustees. Department to be staffed by
professionals with requisite understanding of the workings of the Internet, with
a good knowledge of Intellectual Property Law”
Generally, Dispute Resolution
mechanisms are neutral bodies. The .ng proposal for Dispute
Resolution has the Dispute Resolution body reporting
directly to Manager of the .ng Domain. This ought not to be
the case, as it introduces an inherent conflict of interest.
The particular model prescribed for Dispute Resolution, seems to align itself
more with the internal Administrative structure of the .ng Organization.
A more suitable alternative would be to have the Dispute Resolution
Authority, appointed and reporting directly to the Board of the .ng
Organization. The president of the .ng Organization ought
not to have oversight over the Dispute Resolution body.
Also, the requirement to have
members of the Dispute Resolution body have a prerequisite of, “a
good knowledge of Intellectual Property Law” does not appear sufficient.
Another core prerequisite for the team ought to be in the Dispute
Resolution discipline itself. The prerequisite mandating
knowledge of Intellectual Property appears to take a “Lawyering” posture.
The sole responsibility of Dispute Resolution ought to be the arbitration
of domain conflicts outside of the judicial system.
Other General
Omissions
The following is a list of
other pertinent issues that appear to have been omitted by the .ng Working
Group.
-
Steps to attain
compliance MOU signed between NITDA and ICANN.
-
No mention of a
need to comply with ICANN’s guiding policies and
procedures anywhere within the proposal
-
Technical
Migration Plan for the .ng computing infrastructure was
not discussed.
-
Local Nigerian
Internet Community was not defined
-
Funding structure
for the .ng was not outlined.
-
No proposals for
bylaws of the .ng Organization
-
A strategy to
achieve .ng growth was not outlined
-
Technical
Administration localization.
-
Clear
and precise role of government
-
Specific
standards for Registration Authority
