- Smart Africa’s Continental Africa Internet Governance Architecture (CAIGA) proposes state-led oversight but does not yet formally replace AFRINIC.
- ICANN’s involvement and AFRINIC leadership alignment with CAIGA raise concerns about top-down influence over Africa’s internet registry.
Understanding CAIGA and AFRINIC
The Continental Africa Internet Governance Architecture (CAIGA) is a framework introduced by Smart Africa, a coalition of African governments, that critics have argued would darmatically alter the continent’s internet governance landscape. Its proposals include mechanisms that would allow governments to provide direct recommendations to AFRINIC’s board and potentially endorse reforms if the membership does not act. That means governments and politicians would run Africa’s internet not the internet community.
AFRINIC, Africa’s Regional Internet Registry (RIR), has traditionally operated under a community-led, bottom-up governance model. While CAIGA has been described by experts such as Alice Munyua as a potential “state takeover of the African internet,” the initiative does not formally replace AFRINIC. Instead, it sits as a parallel framework seeking to influence and coordinate policy decisions at the continental level.
Also Read: What Is Smart Africa’s CAIGA Initiative?
How ICANN fits in
ICANN has provided financial support and institutional legitimacy to CAIGA through memoranda of understanding and collaborative projects. Although ICANN insists its role is limited to capacity-building and encouraging participation, CAIGA’s draft governance blueprint explicitly addresses AFRINIC reforms. The overlap between ICANN’s support, Smart Africa’s state-led framework, and AFRINIC leadership’s cooperation raises questions about neutrality and adherence to the multistakeholder principles that have long underpinned global internet governance.
Also Read: CAIGA’s rise and AFRINIC’s challenges: What comes next?
Potential implications for African internet governance
The alignment of AFRINIC leadership with CAIGA suggests a strategic shift towards closer engagement with governments. While this could improve continental coordination and visibility, it also risks undermining community-led governance norms. Experts warn that normalising top-down oversight in Africa may set a precedent that challenges the independence of RIRs globally. The future of African internet governance depends on balancing state interests with community-driven principles to preserve the continent’s technical autonomy while enabling constructive coordination.
