- A legal standoff intensifies between AFRINIC and its third-biggest member, Cloud Innovation
- Questions grow over AFRINIC’s legitimacy as a registry and ICANN’s controversial intervention
AFRINIC’s collapse weakens its legal footing
The African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) finds itself on increasingly fragile legal ground. Once tasked with stewarding Africa’s internet number resources, the registry has become synonymous with dysfunction. After years of governance crisis, it is now legally classified as a “declared company” under Mauritian law—an outcome that signals financial insolvency and loss of operational control. The Registrar of Companies has confirmed AFRINIC’s inability to function without oversight, bringing into question its authority to operate at all.
Despite this collapse, AFRINIC’s remaining leadership continues to resist calls for accountability. Earlier this year, the organisation discarded valid election results due to a dispute over a single proxy—an overreaction that illustrates unworkable election standards. Critics say this reflects AFRINIC’s broader inability to conduct transparent, inclusive governance. Legally and functionally, AFRINIC appears no longer fit to serve as Africa’s regional internet registry.
Also read: Cloud Innovation supports ICANN’s move to derecognise AFRINIC, calls for successor to be immediately identified
Also read: ICANN’s quiet power grab: ICP-2 compliance document raises alarms amid AFRINIC crisis
Cloud Innovation pushes for a reset
In contrast, Cloud Innovation has positioned itself as the actor seeking to salvage what’s left of Africa’s digital future. As AFRINIC’s third-largest member, it has taken the bold step of petitioning for the registry’s dissolution—an action grounded not in opportunism but in necessity. Citing years of irredeemable governance failure, Cloud Innovation has argued that AFRINIC’s continued existence now undermines Africa’s IP resource management.
Its case rests on more than internal collapse. Cloud Innovation has openly requested that ICANN and the Number Resource Organization (NRO) appoint a new RIR to ensure continuity. The company insists that IP allocation must proceed smoothly for the sake of African network operators. While opponents may paint this as aggressive, Cloud Innovation’s legal moves reflect a measured demand for systemic reform, not disruption.
Also read: ICANN CEO’s attempt to thwart freedom of the press, information
Also read: ICANN’s letter to AFRINIC: Fair election oversight or a blow to African self-governance?
ICANN’s quiet power grab draws legal fire
ICANN’s involvement further complicates the legal landscape. Rather than support local processes, the global coordinator of internet resources appears to have over-extended its role in Africa. Its quiet adoption of the controversial ICP-2 compliance framework—which enables ICANN to unilaterally de-recognise regional registries—has sparked accusations of a power grab. Critics allege ICANN bypassed its own multistakeholder processes to push through this change.
Moreover, ICANN’s recent efforts to reinsert itself into AFRINIC’s leadership selection—particularly after a court-certified election—have been viewed as undermining the judiciary. For African stakeholders, this raises the alarm. ICANN was never meant to choose who runs Africa’s RIR. By intervening now, it signals a move toward centralised control and away from the bottom-up governance model it once championed.
Also Read: Cloud Innovation calls for AFRINIC wind-up
Also Read: Cloud Innovation calls for AFRINIC wind-up after ‘impossible’ election standards
The road ahead: A battle for legitimacy
As legal proceedings continue in Mauritius, the core issue remains: who can legitimately manage Africa’s IP address space? With AFRINIC legally constrained and operationally paralysed, many argue its claim to authority no longer stands. Meanwhile, ICANN’s shift in posture—first threatening de-recognition, then backtracking—suggests strategic uncertainty or even an effort to stall reform while maintaining influence.
For Cloud Innovation, the legal path is clear. It seeks to wind up a broken registry and restore trust in internet governance across Africa. Its call is not just for dissolution, but for replacement—a reset that reaffirms transparency, functionality, and regional autonomy. As courts deliberate, the question of who holds the legal upper hand may ultimately decide the future of Africa’s digital independence.
