APNIC Home

Proposed APNIC By-law Reform 2025

In response to community feedback, the APNIC Executive Council (EC) is conducting a consultation on two potential amendments to the APNIC By-laws to:

  • Extend EC member’s terms from two to three years.
  • Introduce terms limits of three terms for EC members.

The EC will consider feedback received during the consultations and determine the final amendments, with a vote of APNIC Members intended to be held at APNIC 60 in September 2025.

The proposals below are drafts that have been prepared to encourage community discussion. The final wording will be completed after community feedback is considered.

Get involved – community consultation

Your thoughts on the proposals are welcomed by 18 April 2025.

The APNIC Secretariat held an online community consultation session where APNIC Members and the community were invited to ask questions and provide feedback on the proposals.

The consultation session was held on Monday, 7 April 2025 at 14:00 (UTC +10). The recording is available.

A summary of the feedback received can be found at the bottom of this page. For the full transcript, please click the recording link above.

We encourage you to discuss the proposals further on the APNIC-Talk list on Orbit.

Proposed reforms

Proposal 1 – Extension of Executive Council terms

It is proposed that APNIC EC member’s terms are extended from two to three years.

Current APNIC position

APNIC EC members each serve a two-year term, but are eligible for re-election (by-law 33).

Position of other RIRs and ICANN

The proposal is consistent with the position of all the other RIRs and ICANN. The terms of their directors are three years.

Considerations

Three-year terms are more in line with industry standards and reflect good corporate governance in so far as they allow for:

  • Stability in leadership: With the current two-year terms, there is the potential for four seats (more than half of the elected EC members) to change every two years, which could lead to significant instability and loss of experience and corporate knowledge.
  • Greater accountability: Involvement in and accountability for multiple years of budget and activity planning, providing a greater opportunity to shape APNIC’s strategic priorities.
  • Increased expertise: A three-year term allows EC members to deepen their understanding of the priorities of APNIC Members and the challenges, policies, and culture of APNIC, which can lead to better decision-making.

Proposal 2 – Introduction of Executive Council term limits

It is proposed that a term limit of three terms is introduced for the EC members.

Current position

The by-laws do not provide for term limits for APNIC’s EC members.

Position of other RIRs and ICANN

The directors of ICANN and ARIN cannot serve more than three consecutive terms. AFRINIC, LACNIC, and RIPE NCC do not currently impose term limits on their board members.

Considerations

  • Board renewal: Term limits ensure there is adequate opportunity for EC renewal, allowing for fresh perspectives and new ideas to be introduced.
  • Leadership opportunities: They provide greater opportunities for the next generation of leaders to participate in APNIC’s governance, fostering a diverse and dynamic EC.

Member vote

After Member feedback is considered, and final wording is completed, the EC intends to put the proposed by-law reforms to a Member vote at APNIC 60 in September 2025.

More information on the final proposals, including how to vote, will be published prior to APNIC 60.

Consultation session feedback

Below is a sample of the feedback and questions received in the online community consultations session held on Monday, 7 April 2025 at 14:00 (UTC +10).

Feedback and questions on the proposals

Feedback summary

There was general support for the proposals from those who provided feedback during the online consultation session.

One community member noted that the community is already quite familiar with the current mechanism and that this proposal makes simple things even more complicated.

The EC were also asked by a community member to provide their comments on the proposals. Kenny Huang, Roopinder Singh Perhar, and Achie Atienza spoke in favour of the proposals.

Question: Can EC members be re-elected after three terms?

Secretariat answer: The proposal is presented as an absolute limit of three terms, meaning an EC member could not be re-elected after serving three terms. We encourage the community to provide feedback on this.

Question: How will the reforms apply to the current EC members?

Secretariat answer: This has not been determined yet. How they will be implemented will be considered after receiving the community’s feedback.

We note that the change in term lengths will require a transitional period.

We encourage you to provide your feedback on how the reforms might be applied to the current EC members.

Community feedback:

  • The EC Members should move to three-year terms if they are re-elected, provided they haven’t been in the seat for something close to nine-years.
  • If the candidate has been an EC member for 10 years (five terms), then they should not be allowed to renominate. If they have been on the EC for less time, they can be re-elected for three years, but we will need to decide how we count the number of terms, or if it’s per year or per term.
  • One approach is to look at the existing amount of years that each EC member has currently served for and use that as a way to determine whether or not they stand for re-election, to align with nine years.

Question: LACNIC and RIPE NCC do not have term limits. Is there a reason for this different structure?

Secretariat answer: The Secretariat advised that they were not aware of the reasons why LACNIC or RIPE NCC do not have term limits, or if it has previously been considered by their communities.

Following the consultation session, it has been confirmed that to the best of our knowledge the LACNIC and RIPE NCC Members have not formally considered term limits for their respective board members.

Question: What is the consultation and reform process?

Secretariat answer: The process will involve:

  1. Community consultation on the high-level proposals, via feedback during this webinar and on the APNIC-Talk mailing list by 18 April 2025
  2. EC review of feedback and development of final proposals
  3. Information sessions on final proposals
  4. Member vote

Community feedback:

  • I’d like to see separately to this a framework in place as to how we get new involvement in the community. I think there is a lot of appetite for there to be kind of a navigable structure. I’ve seen in the community several people commenting about getting lost within the kind of APNIC Framework and how to participate.

Question: What is the status of the suggested reform to introduce appointed independent directors?

Secretariat answer: The EC discussed this suggestion from Jonathan Brewer and responded to him, which can be found on the EC correspondence and feedback page on the APNIC website. The EC advised that further consideration was needed, especially with regard to the potential impact on the EC’s structure and processes if independent directors were introduced.

The EC has committed to continuing to consider the proposal.

Community feedback:

  • As a community member, we definitely think that the APNIC EC Board does need a bit of diversity. I know that everyone wants it to be diverse, but we are not seeing that much diversity.