- Supporters present CAIGA as a pathway to continental coordination, but critics warn it could accelerate governance fragmentation rather than resolve it.
- Concerns are growing that Smart Africa and ICANN are enabling political consolidation at the expense of Africa’s long-standing multistakeholder structures.
A continental solution—or a political diversion?
Africa’s internet governance landscape is already strained. AFRINIC, the region’s only internet registry, has spent years paralysed by lawsuits, governance failures and repeated election breakdowns. Into this vacuum comes the Continental Africa Internet Governance Architecture (CAIGA), a state-centred framework developed by Smart Africa and financially supported by ICANN.
CAIGA is being promoted as a mechanism to unify African internet governance and reduce “fragmentation” between states, regulators and communities. But critics argue the initiative is less about strengthening technical coordination and more about centralising power. Instead of addressing AFRINIC’s structural problems—weak audits, unstable leadership and the erosion of community trust—CAIGA adds an entirely new political layer with authority above the registry itself.
That, opponents warn, risks creating more fragmentation, not less.
Also Read: Why Africa’s internet community is concerned about CAIGA
Smart Africa’s model risks sidelining communities
Rather than stitching Africa’s internet ecosystem together, CAIGA may split it further by pushing governments—not operators, engineers or community members—into primary decision-making roles. Veteran governance experts warn this shift undermines the multistakeholder model that has stabilised Africa’s infrastructure for two decades.
Fragmentation can occur not only between countries but also between communities and governments, and CAIGA appears designed to favour the latter. With proposals for political endorsement mechanisms and a Permanent Secretary outside community oversight, CAIGA risks replacing open participation with a top-down political mandate.
Also Read: CAIGA and digital sovereignty: What it means for African countries
ICANN’s involvement deepens the credibility crisis
ICANN’s financial and institutional support for the Smart Africa blueprint has fuelled accusations of hypocrisy. The organisation that built its identity on defending bottom-up governance is now linked to a framework critics describe as a political takeover of AFRINIC. Instead of reducing fragmentation, ICANN’s involvement may legitimise a model that fractures trust between Africa and the global multistakeholder system.
If CAIGA is implemented without genuine community leadership and transparent safeguards, it may not unite Africa’s digital future—it may harden divisions and undermine regional autonomy at the moment it is needed most.
