- Disputes over AFRINIC’s election processes raise questions about transparency and governance in internet resource management.
- The outcome of AFRINIC’s governance challenges has implications beyond Africa, influencing global trust in internet institutions.
The weight of AFRINIC’s role
The African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) is the Regional Internet Registry (RIR) responsible for allocating IP addresses and managing internet resources across Africa. Its role is technical but it carries political weight, since the body operates as part of a global framework that includes RIPE NCC in Europe, APNIC in Asia Pacific, ARIN in North America, and LACNIC in Latin America. Together these five registries shape how the internet’s infrastructure functions.
Elections within AFRINIC determine its board leadership, and disputes over those elections therefore raise questions about legitimacy and trust. Recent conflicts over AFRINIC’s election rules and procedures have drawn international attention. If one registry suffers from weak governance, the effect can spill over to the wider system of internet governance.
Also Read: Special report: Smart Africa leaked email list was obtained without consent
Questions of legitimacy and transparency
BTW Media and legal experts reviewed 581 AFRINIC election registrations (as of Sept 7, 2025) and found major flaws. 70% showed issues such as misleading titles, unclear company links, or repeated voter use. Rules requiring C-level sign-off were often ignored, with only job titles provided and no nominators named.
In 218 cases, titles didn’t match voter names, and where nominators differed, no identifying details were given. This exposes a serious transparency gap.Accepting the September AFRINIC election would be unjustified, as systemic registration irregularities undermine its legitimacy.
Concerns have been raised by community members who say that the voting process is vulnerable to manipulation. Others claim that AFRINIC has failed to provide clear and consistent rules, which weakens confidence in its decision-making. The credibility of elections at AFRINIC matters not just for Africa, but for the entire global internet ecosystem.
Also read: AFRINIC and the risk of disputed elections in a weak legal framework
Implications for global governance
The internet relies on cooperation among distributed institutions. While each Regional Internet Registry functions independently, they share principles of accountability and fairness. If AFRINIC’s electoral legitimacy is in doubt, it undermines the cooperative model.
One major concern is the perception of bias. When members of AFRINIC or external stakeholders believe that elections are not fair, it reduces trust in policies that affect the allocation of scarce resources such as IPv4 addresses.
Trust is crucial because the system is built on voluntary compliance. No central authority enforces these rules; they work only if participants respect the governance structures.
The ripple effect can reach beyond Africa. If other registries or international bodies perceive instability, they may hesitate to cooperate or may push for more centralised oversight. Such a development would reshape the balance between regional autonomy and global coordination, a core principle in internet governance debates.
Also read: AFRINIC election: Voter fraud uncovered as ECom member threatens to resign
Also read: Why AFRINIC’s election security needs stronger legal guarantees in Mauritius
A regional issue with global resonance
The stakes of AFRINIC’s elections extend beyond administrative disputes. They reflect larger questions of who controls internet resources, how accountability is enforced, and whether regional bodies can act independently while upholding global trust.
For stakeholders in Africa, election legitimacy is about fair representation. For the international community, it is about maintaining the stability of governance model that underpins the internet as a shared resource.
