Hi Schéhérazade,
On 05/13/2016 09:02 AM, sche_at_ict.io wrote:
>
> The following Consultation document
> https://www.icta.mu/mediaoffice/2007/dotmu/dotmu-public-consultation.pdf
> clearly shows the case had to be referred to the Supreme Court.
I'd say no, at no moment there was any court case. A lexpress.mu [1]
article of 2 December 2014 cites Mr Tassarajen Pillay, the then Minister
of Information & Communication Technologies saying «nous n’allons pas
faire son procès. Nous laissons aux instances appropriées de le faire».
Any mention of court case has only been a buzz around town. People talk
about legal actions a lot of times, even ministers do, but they do not
always end up in a real court of law.
>
> In fact the case was withdrawn by the Government of Mauritius in January 2015.
> Instead, the Mauritian government and Internet Direct Ltd have been in
> discussion for an amicable settlement for the amount owed by the
> Government.
If you refer to page 68 of the Parliamentary Debates [2] (Hansard) of 10
February 2015, you will find that Mr Pravind Jugnauth, the then Minister
of Technology, Communication & Innovation, replied:
«These were the figures that were proposed to Government, but I
understand that there has been no conclusion of any sort of amicable
settlement.»
On page 67, the Minister mentions establishment of a Multi-Stakeholder
Forum for the purpose of re-delegation of the .mu ccTLD. Mauritius
Internet Users participated in that forum and you will find much of the
meeting notes in the mailing list archive.
[1]
http://www.lexpress.mu/article/255852/tassarajen-pillay-chedumbrum-une-bataille-juridique-lancee-pour-recouvrer-govmu
[2]
http://mauritiusassembly.govmu.org/English/hansard/Documents/2015/hansard0215.pdf
Regards,
--
Ish Sookun
I drink coffee and manage Linux servers for lexpress.mu.
Received on Tue May 17 2016 - 19:04:52 PST