- Acting President Jean Yvan Robert Hungley revokes Judge Bellepeau’s mandate to investigate AFRINIC, deepening its governance crisis.
- The episode underscores how Mauritius’ constitutional checks and executive interference shape AFRINIC’s regional operations.
Executive intervention raises constitutional questions
On 21 August 2025, the Acting President of Mauritius, Jean Yvan Robert Hungley, issued an official proclamation revoking Puisne Judge Nicolas Ohsan-Bellepeau’s mandate to investigate the affairs of AFRINIC, the African Network Information Centre. The proclamation, published in the Government Gazette, explicitly cancelled Proclamation No. 10 of 2025, which had originally appointed Bellepeau as inspector into AFRINIC’s finances and governance.
The revocation followed Bellepeau’s resignation on 18 August after the Mauritian Supreme Court froze his mandate through an emergency injunction, citing constitutional concerns. The decision brings a formal close to a short-lived appointment that had already attracted criticism for breaching the separation of powers.
This episode illustrates how Mauritius’ constitutional framework — balancing executive authority with judicial oversight — directly shapes the governance of AFRINIC, which, while serving all of Africa, remains incorporated as a private company in Mauritius.
AFRINIC governance crisis intensifies
AFRINIC has been in a governance crisis since it was placed under receivership in 2023. The registry currently has no functioning board or chief executive, leaving its operations paralysed. Its June 2025 board elections were annulled following disputes over proxy votes, further weakening its legitimacy.
In response to the leadership vacuum, the Registrar of Companies sought the appointment of an inspector, leading to Bellepeau’s designation earlier this year. But legal experts and stakeholders quickly raised concerns. On 5 August, the Supreme Court issued an injunction suspending Bellepeau’s powers, questioning whether the executive had overstepped its legal authority under the Companies Act of 2001.
The Court also pointed to potential conflicts of interest, noting Bellepeau’s prior involvement in AFRINIC-related proceedings. Facing this legal impasse, Bellepeau resigned, forcing the Acting President to formally revoke his mandate.
The intervention of the executive branch in AFRINIC’s affairs raised serious constitutional concerns, Mauritius’ constitutional order is designed to protect judicial independence. When executive proclamations interfere in ongoing corporate and judicial matters, it risks undermining both governance and democracy.
Also read: 5 people destroying AFRINIC and turning Mauritius into an anarchy
Also read: Constitutional tensions in Mauritius as AFRINIC flounders
The role of the judiciary in safeguarding rule of law
The Mauritius’ constitutional framework places great emphasis on judicial independence, a principle now being tested in the AFRINIC dispute. By issuing injunction has against the inspector’s appointment, the Supreme Court reinforced the role as the guardline of the law rule, restraining executive overreach.
This balance of power is crucial as AFRINIC’s legitimacy is not only depends on technical role as RIR, but also on the credibility of governance. Courts, rather than political actors, are tasked with determining whether AFRINIC’s operations is comply with statutory obligations.
AFRINIC crisis has now escalated into a constitutional flashpoint. The dispute is no longer about AFRINIC alone, it has become a test of whether Mauritius can uphold democratic principles when global internet governance collides with national politics.
Also read: AFRINIC launches voter onboarding ahead of board election
Also read: ICANN or ICan’t? CEO Lindqvist chooses dictatorship over democracy in AFRINIC
Government interference threatens democratic norms
Government’s intervention in AFRINIC’s affairs risks setting a precedent of executive interference in corporate and judicial domains. For an organisation that underpins internet access for the entire African continent, this is more than a local governance issue — it raises questions about the stability of regional internet operations.
AFRINIC’s crisis has a far-reaching consequence. The organisation is responsible for allocating IPv4 addresses which are critical to Africa’s digital development. Without functional leadership, its ability to allocate resources efficiently and transparently is in jeopardy. Moreover, the Mauritius case has illustrates the tension between regional internet governance and national constitutional frameworks. AFRINIC’s incorporation in Mauritius is ties its fate to the country’s constitutional order, meaning executive actions and judicial interventions within Mauritius have continent-wide repercussions.
The integrity of AFRINIC’s governance matters to every internet user in Africa, the moment domestic politics interfere with judicial processes, it undermines trust in the neutrality and stability of the entire internet governance system.
A constitutional crisis with continental consequences
Acting President Hungley’s proclamation have formally ended Bellepeau’s short-lived appointment. For now, AFRINIC remains without a board, a CEO, or an inspector. With its future hanging in the balance, the episode demonstrates how Mauritius’ constitutional framework is shaping, the governance of Africa’s sole Regional Internet Registry.
