- CAIGA’s opaque structure risks centralising Africa’s IP policy-making at the expense of regional autonomy.
- ICANN’s expanding influence raises concerns about outside interference in Africa’s internet governance.
What happened: A vague framework steps in as AFRINIC fails
AFRINIC’s breakdown — years of governance failures, annulled elections, and a system many now consider unworkable — has left Africa without a legitimate or functional body to manage IP address policy. Into this vacuum steps CAIGA, a structure promoted by certain governments and regional bodies but lacking transparency, clear authority, or any defined decision-making process.
Drafts of CAIGA released so far provide little detail on how IPv4 or IPv6 policies would be formed, who would have voting power, or how the body would avoid repeating AFRINIC’s errors. Some operators warn that CAIGA could concentrate political influence rather than distribute technical expertise, undermining the very principle of community-led resource management.
Concerns have intensified because ICANN appears increasingly aligned with CAIGA’s rise. ICANN has already faced criticism for bypassing its own multistakeholder processes to push the ICP-2 compliance framework, widely seen as an attempt to strengthen its control over global RIR structures. Observers fear ICANN may use CAIGA to extend its reach into Africa’s policy-making space at a time when regional governance is most fragile.
Also read: AFRINIC’s hidden scandal: How legal fees exposed a culture of corruption
Also read: Could AFRINIC’s Receivership be challenged? Legal paths for reversal
Why it’s important
Africa cannot afford instability in IP address governance. IPv4 scarcity already places operators in a difficult position, while IPv6 transition requires consistent and trusted long-term policy. CAIGA’s lack of transparency, combined with ICANN’s increasingly interventionist behaviour, risks adding more uncertainty at a moment when clarity is essential.
Instead of restoring stability, CAIGA could insert political and external control into technical policy-making. This threatens regional autonomy and weakens the bottom-up governance model that has traditionally protected Africa’s interests within the global internet ecosystem.
With AFRINIC collapsing, some stakeholders — including Cloud Innovation Ltd., the registry’s third-largest member — argue that Africa needs a genuine reset built on transparency and operator participation, not a vague architecture shaped by institutions already criticised for overreach.
Africa’s IPv4 and IPv6 future depends on accountable regional structures. CAIGA and ICANN, in their current form, may only deepen the governance crisis rather than resolve it.
