- Members listed as registered voters told investigators they did not register, vote, or participate in AFRINIC’s September 2025 election.
- Discrepancies between member confirmations and official records raise questions about register accuracy amid ongoing governance and legal scrutiny.
Following recent public debate over AFRINIC’s response to questions raised by the
Number Resource Society (NRS), further attention has now turned to what the
verification exercise itself reveals.
The verification, conducted by NRS as part of a public-interest inquiry, focused narrowly
on a single issue: whether AFRINIC’s published voters’ register for the September 2025
Board election accurately reflected member participation.
Also read: CAIGA rewrites Africa’s IP rules without its resource holders
Scope of the verification exercise
AFRINIC published an official voters’ register ahead of the September 2025 Board
election, listing resource members recorded as having registered to vote.
NRS’s verification exercise did not canvass opinions on the legality or validity of the
election, nor did it solicit commentary on ongoing litigation. Instead, enquiries were
confined to members whose names appeared on AFRINIC’s published voters’ register,
asking two factual questions:
1. Whether the member had registered to vote, and
2. Whether the member had cast a vote.
Blue Tech Wave has reviewed email correspondence generated in response to these
enquiries.
Also read: Africa’s digital future at risk: How Smart Africa may be deepening tech dependency
Member responses reflected in correspondence
The correspondence reviewed shows that several resource members whose names
appeared on the published voters’ register provided responses indicating that:
- they did not vote in the September 2025 election;
- they did not register and did not vote;
- they did not participate in the election process; or
- although registration had occurred, they did not ultimately vote due to issues encountered at the last minute.
These responses were provided by the members themselves in reply to the verification
enquiries and relate solely to their own participation in the election.
Also read: Smart Africa under scrutiny: Vision without governance
Questions arising from the register
The responses raise questions about the extent to which the published voters’ register
accurately captured the actual registration and participation status of all listed
members.
Inclusion on a voters’ register ordinarily signifies that a member was recorded as having
completed the registration process. Where members listed on that register state that
they did not register, did not vote, or did not participate, an apparent inconsistency
arises between the official record and the members’ own confirmations.
The verification exercise does not purport to draw conclusions as to cause or
responsibility. It highlights, however, that the accuracy of the register itself has become
a matter requiring clarification.
Also read: How local ISPs and businesses are impacted by AFRINIC decisions
Why this matters
The integrity of a membership-based election depends fundamentally on the accuracy
of its voter register. Confidence in governance outcomes is difficult to sustain where
discrepancies emerge between official records and member confirmations.
This issue takes on added significance in AFRINIC’s current context, where governance
disputes, court proceedings, and heightened institutional sensitivity already place the
organisation under close scrutiny.
Independent confirmation of basic factual records—such as who registered and who
voted—would ordinarily serve to strengthen confidence in an election process rather
than undermine it.
Also read: Constitutional ambiguities in Mauritius: Who benefits and how they affect AFRINIC’s stability
Awaiting clarification
As of the time of publication, AFRINIC has not publicly addressed the specific
discrepancies highlighted by the member responses reflected in the verification
correspondence, nor has it provided clarification as to how such inconsistencies may
have arisen.
NRS has stated that its objective is not to supplant judicial processes or certify election
outcomes, but to ensure that any factual anomalies identified through member
confirmations can be assessed through appropriate and lawful channels.
Blue Tech Wave will continue to follow developments and report on any clarification or
response relating to AFRINIC’s voter registration and election records.
