• Mauritius’ courts and company law are now instrumental in the AFRINIC board election process, but recent elections—including the September 2025 vote—have been annulled or delayed, raising doubts about whether any election under current conditions can be legitimate.
• Stakeholders such as Cloud Innovation Ltd. argue that procedural deviations (such as bans on proxies or POAs, online-only voting, or extensions granted without consent) violate both AFRINIC’s bylaws and Mauritian company law, pushing them to recommend dissolving AFRINIC depending on whether a trustworthy alternative can be arranged.
Legal oversight and receivership
Mauritian courts in 2024 appointed an Official Receiver to oversee AFRINIC’s governance due to its prolonged paralysis and legal disputes. The receiver is charged with organising board elections under the oversight of the court system. Under Mauritius’ Companies Act 2001, a receiver appointed by the court replaces board powers temporarily, and must act as an officer of the court—his mandate including adherence to the law and AFRINIC’s own bylaws.
Cloud Innovation Ltd., AFRINIC’s third-largest member, has repeatedly pointed out that changes made by the receiver (such as extending the election deadline to 30 September 2025 and altering voting procedures) were done without its consent, and arguably without legal justification under the Companies Act or AFRINIC’s constitution.
Also read: AFRINIC election results face legitimacy challenge over governance breaches
Also read: AFRINIC election: Voter fraud uncovered as ECom member threatens to resign
Election irregularities and annulment of September 2025 vote
The most recent board election, scheduled for September 2025, follows earlier attempts (notably in June 2025) that were annulled. In June, a single disputed proxy vote led to the cancellation of an entire election, dissenters argue that this threshold is unworkable and effectively strips away many voting rights.
Observers have raised concerns over:
• Whether bans on proxies and powers of attorney violate members’ rights under AFRINIC’s bylaws.
• Whether online-only voting options, with no physical voting alternative, disadvantage certain members and violate legal or governance norms expected by Courts in Mauritius.
These irregularities feed into broader fears that AFRINIC’s governance crisis is systemic, and that the September election—even if held—is unlikely to resolve them unless the process is demonstrably lawful and transparent.
Political and constitutional norms in Mauritius
Mauritius’ political system features a mature parliamentary democracy, with legal protections for shareholders and companies. Under its Companies Act 2001, shareholders who believe they are being unfairly prejudiced by management (or by structural governance failures) have recourse to courts.
The state has also invoked its legislative powers: for example, AFRINIC was declared a “Declared Company” under Mauritius’ Companies Act in mid-2025, which enables tighter governmental oversight and regulatory intervention.
Moreover, ICANN, which recognises AFRINIC as the regional Internet registry for Africa, has formally signalled that the election irregularities “raised serious questions” about AFRINIC’s legitimacy and warned that non-compliance with standards (e.g. under the ICP-2 criteria for RIR recognition) could lead to further intervention.
Is dissolution inevitable — or avoidable?
Given the accumulation of legal, procedural, and institutional failures, stakeholders like Cloud Innovation argue that AFRINIC is a failed registry whose governance is irreparably broken. They contend that even re-running elections under the current framework will lead to recurring disputes: the thresholds for invalidation (e.g. a single proxy) are so low that legitimacy remains at risk.
However, some counter-points to consider:
• The role of Mauritius’ legal framework and precedent means that dissolution is a serious step and would likely involve complex liquidation under the Companies Act. It would need to balance continuity of service, rights of members, and protection of Africa’s IP resource management.
• Reformed elections could still succeed if the procedural changes (proxies, POAs, voting modes, etc.) are aligned clearly with bylaws and company law, and supervised in an open, inclusive way.
