- Cloud Innovation claims AFRINIC’s governance is irreparably broken, calling for its judicial wind‑up following annulment of the 2025 board election over a single disputed proxy vote.
- ICANN has warned of possible derecognition; critics argue AFRINIC’s election rules make fair polls “unworkable,” setting a dangerous precedent.
AFRINIC cancels election over one proxy dispute
AFRINIC abruptly cancelled its June 2025 board election due to a single proxy vote dispute, invalidating the entire process and discarding valid votes submitted by numerous members. This triggered widespread criticism across the community.
Cloud Innovation Ltd., AFRINIC’s third-largest member, responded with a formal request for the judicial wind-up of the registry, describing AFRINIC as a “failed organisation” with governance “beyond repair”. It warned that if one unverified proxy could collapse an entire election, no democratic process is viable under AFRINIC rules.
AFRINIC’s actions drew attention from ICANN, whose CEO Kurt Erik Lindqvist issued a 25 June letter threatening derecognition unless the registry addressed compliance concerns. The situation has raised doubts about the integrity of AFRINIC’s governance and its ability to manage IP address resources in Africa.
Also read: Cloud Innovation calls for AFRINIC wind-up after ‘impossible’ election standards
Also read: EXPOSED: The letter that reveals who was really benefitting from AFRINIC’s lawsuits
AFRINIC’s collapse signals wider threats to African digital sovereignty
This case reflects what many now call a complete collapse of AFRINIC’s governance. By cancelling a full board election over a single proxy vote, AFRINIC discarded member participation on shaky grounds. Critics argue this exposes an “unworkable” electoral framework—one that no longer allows for fair representation.
Cloud Innovation’s demand for dissolution highlights a growing consensus that AFRINIC, as a registry, has lost its legitimacy. ICANN’s reaction, including references to ICP-2 compliance, shows the situation is no longer internal—international governance bodies are considering deregistration and replacement.
However, ICANN itself is not free from criticism. Observers argue its interest in AFRINIC’s affairs represents a quiet power grab that could override Africa’s bottom-up governance model. Its adoption of ICP-2 without full consensus suggests a strategic shift toward centralised control of regional internet resources.
Without urgent intervention, AFRINIC’s fate may set a precedent for how much say African stakeholders truly have in their digital future.
