[Ws2-jurisdiction] FW: No more IP addresses for countries that shut down internet access

[Olawale Bakare]

Hi,

Thanks, Paul. It would eventually be wrangling with the legal or judicial
system of individual's government in the end.

Regards,
Wale

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:26 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Colleagues
>
>
>
> The below article may be of interest, especially as it bears on the
> question of when /how internet freedom might be impinged upon.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
>
> paul.rosenzweig at gmail.com
>
> M: +1 (202) 329 9650 <+1%20202-329-9650>
>
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <+1%20202-738-1739>
>
> CR: +506 7008 3964 <+506%207008%203964>
>
> My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=
> 0x9A830097CA066684
>
>
>
> *No more IP addresses for countries that shut down internet access*
>
>
>
> Afrinic mulls punitive policy for errant governments
>
>
>
> 12 Apr 2017 at 19:54,  Kieren McCarthy
>
>
>
> Governments that cut off internet access to their citizens could find
> themselves refused new IP addresses under a proposal put through one of the
> five global IP allocation organizations.
>
>
>
> The suggested clampdown will be considered at the next meeting of internet
> registry Afrinic in Kenya in June: Afrinic is in charge of managing and
> allocating IP address blocks across Africa.
>
>
>
> Under the proposal, a new section would be added to Afrinic's official
> rules that would allow the organization to refuse to hand over any new IP
> address to a country for 12 months if it is found to have ordered an
> internet shutdown.
>
>
>
> The ban would cover all government-owned entities and others that have a
> "direct provable relationship with said government." It would also cover
> any transfer of address space to those entities from others.
>
>
>
> That withdrawal of services would escalate if the country continued to
> pull the plug on internet access. Under the proposal: "In the event of a
> government performing three or more such shutdowns in a period of 10 years
> – all resources to the aforementioned entities shall be revoked and no
> allocations to said entities shall occur for a period of 5 years."
>
>
>
> The proposal was sparked by a recent increase in the number of complete
> nationwide shutdowns of internet service – something that has been a cause
> of increasing concern and ire within the internet infrastructure community.
>
>
>
> The start
>
>
>
> The trend started during the Egyptian revolution back in 2011 when
> authorities killed the entire's country web access prior to a big protest
> march. Employees of ISPs and mobile phone companies reported troops turning
> up at their homes and pointing guns at their families in order to enforce
> the shutdown.
>
>
>
> Until then, many governments had assumed it was largely impossible to turn
> off internet access to their entire nation. Soon after, government
> departments educated themselves about AS numbers and internet routing and
> started using their power to set up systems that would allow them to order
> the shutdown of all networks from a central point.
>
>
>
> While some countries only used this ability in the more dire circumstances
> – riots or terrorist attacks – shutdowns quickly started being used
> preemptively and for political reasons.
>
>
>
> Bangladesh switched off its entire country's net connectivity prior to the
> sentencing of former government leaders for war crimes. Then Iraq started
> shutting down the entire country for several hours at a time in order to
> prevent exam cheating.
>
>
>
> While these were enormously frustrating, the shutdown typically lasted
> only a few hours. But then Cameroon decided to cut off the internet for
> weeks – and targeted specific communities. The country's southwest and
> northwest provinces were taken offline following violent protests: a
> decision that had a hugely damaging impact on its "Silicon Mountain"
> startup zone, and also took down its banks and ATMs.
>
>
>
> In India, the number and frequency of internet shutdowns has sparked a new
> protest movement and website that tracks them.
>
>
>
> The situation has grown so dire that the United Nations got involved and
> officially condemned the practice at a meeting of the Human Rights Council
> back in July. Despite opposition from a number of countries – including
> China, Russia, India and Kenya – a resolution passed forbidding mass web
> blockades.
>
>
>
> Plan
>
>
>
> The reality, however, is that there is nothing to prevent governments from
> shutting down the internet and very little anyone can do in the face of a
> determined push from the authorities.
>
>
>
> But now the techies are fighting back. The Afrinic proposal has been put
> forward by the CTO and the Head of IP strategy for Liquid
> Telecommunications – a large pan-African ISP – as well as the CEO of
> Kenya's main ISP Association. As such it is a proposal that many are taking
> seriously.
>
>
>
> "While the authors of this policy acknowledge that what is proposed is
> draconian in nature, we feel that the time has come for action to be taken,
> rather than just bland statements that have shown to have little or no
> effect," they wrote, noting that "over the last few years we have seen more
> and more governments shutting down the free and open access to the internet
> in order to push political and other agendas."
>
>
>
> Whether governments like it or not, they are reliant on the provision of
> IP address to expand their networks and digital economy, and Afrinic is the
> only organization that can realistically provide them. If the policy does
> get passed, it would almost certainly act as a strong deterrent for
> government ministers to shutting down internet access.
>
>
>
> But there are a wealth of problems with the idea, not least of which would
> be the determination of what represents an internet shutdown. The authors
> put forward a suggested definition:
>
>
>
> An internet shutdown is deemed to have occurred when it can be proved that
> there was an attempt, failed or successful, to restrict access to the
> internet to a segment of the population irrespective of the provider or
> access medium that they utilize.
>
>
>
> That wording is likely to be very heavily scrutinized. And it would
> require someone or group to make a determination that it has happened –
> which would likely become a politically charged decision. And none of that
> considers the fact that national leaders are unlikely to accept punitive
> terms being placed against them by a third party.
>
>
>
> In short, it is a huge political headache. But it may also be one that
> only the internet community is capable to taking on and winning. The next
> few months will see whether the 'net community in Africa is willing to take
> on the challenge for the greater good. ®
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170425/e2a15426/attachment.html>