Summary

  • Jonathan Brewer proposed appointed independent directors to broaden the experience and representation of APNIC’s Executive Council. In December 2024, the Council said it would explore models and aim to decide during 2025.
  • Its signed reply of 10 February 2026 chose a fully elected Council instead. It asked for work on the eligibility, process and practical barriers that shape who reaches the ballot.

The empty chair is a popular cure for a board’s missing voices. Put an independent person in it, the argument goes, and the room changes. Jonathan Brewer raised that idea at APNIC’s September 2024 Member Meeting, pointing to gender diversity on the Executive Council. The Council’s December reply promised to examine the effect on its structure and processes, aiming for a decision in 2025 on whether to seek a by-law change. The chair stayed empty while the letters kept arriving.

Brewer’s February 2025 letter did something more careful than buying the easy sales pitch. He discussed claims that diverse boards make more money, then pointed to the weakness of a simple financial link. His case for a broader board rested on governance, risk and perspective. Appointed directors were one route he wanted the Council to explore. He was asking who might be missing when members choose from the people already willing and able to run.

The signed Council answer of 10 February 2026 moved the argument from the chair to the ballot. It said a fully elected Council was integral to accountability, transparency and member trust; members should retain ultimate discretion over its composition. APNIC would not introduce appointed independent director positions at that time. For specialist expertise, the Council pointed to advice it could obtain separately. For representation, it asked the Secretariat to support community discussion of eligibility rules, process obstacles, practical impediments and cultural barriers that might discourage candidates.

That is a real change in mechanism. An appointed seat changes the selector: somebody must choose the independent director and answer for that choice. Keeping every seat elected leaves selection with members, while shifting the hard work earlier, to finding and supporting candidates. The February letter called for a stronger pipeline, particularly for women. It also saw proposed term limits as an opening for new contenders, subject then to member approval. APNIC’s March 2026 follow-up acknowledged that its response had been delayed, said the representation discussion remained open and reported that term limits had since been introduced.

Brewer did not get the independent chair he asked the Council to consider. He did get a written answer naming the place where APNIC now says it will act: the route from a qualified community member to a credible candidacy. A ballot can only choose among names that make it onto the paper.