- AFRINIC’s September 2025 elections flouted bylaws, raising legitimacy concerns and exposing weaknesses in Mauritius’ constitutional oversight.
- The annulment of the June 2025 election over one proxy dispute remains the only lawful outcome, underscoring the inconsistency of judicial intervention.
Elections that deepen rather than resolve the crisis
The African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) manages internet number resources across Africa and is one of five Regional Internet Registries in the world. Court oversight was meant to restore order. Instead, the events of 2025 have highlighted deep constitutional challenges.
The June 2025 election was annulled over a single contested proxy vote, despite otherwise adhering to AFRINIC’s bylaws. That decision was controversial but still within a legal framework. Yet when members voted again in September, they did so under a process that openly violated AFRINIC’s constitution. The result is a governance crisis that now tests Mauritius’ capacity to enforce the rule of law.
Also read: AFRINIC election results face legitimacy challenge over governance breaches
Also read: AFRINIC election: Voter fraud uncovered as ECom member threatens to resign
September’s unlawful process
AFRINIC’s constitution and bylaws are detailed and designed to prevent conflicts of interest. In September 2025, those safeguards were discarded.
- Bylaw 9.1 and 9.1-A state that no one domiciled in a region with an open board seat can serve on the Nominations Committee (NomCom), and that no NomCom member may stand for election. With all five sub-regions up for renewal, compliance was impossible, yet a NomCom was assembled regardless. This undermined neutrality in candidate selection.
- Bylaw 12.12 guarantees proxy voting rights. Proxies allow members to vote when not present in person or online, reflecting Africa’s geographic scale. In September, the Receiver unilaterally abolished this right, citing the disputed proxy from June. That decision disenfranchised members and contravened AFRINIC’s constitution and the Mauritian Companies Act.
- Section 13 requires directors to be appointed through lawful elections. The September vote bypassed these rules by altering procedures without member consent, leaving directors “elected” outside the legal framework.
These breaches strike at the heart of AFRINIC’s legitimacy. If one disputed proxy in June was enough to void an election, then multiple explicit violations in September should render the process doubly unlawful.
Wider implications for Mauritius and the global internet
AFRINIC’s legitimacy matters far beyond its headquarters in Mauritius. The organisation allocates IP addresses for the entire African continent and plays a critical role in global internet governance. Its recognition depends on adherence to transparency, neutrality and constitutional order.
By permitting an election that violated AFRINIC’s own rules, Mauritius risks setting a precedent that weakens trust in its judiciary and its ability to uphold international obligations. If bylaws can be set aside so easily, the foundations of governance erode. For a state that hosts a Regional Internet Registry, this is a constitutional test with global visibility.
Also read: The link between constitutional reform in Mauritius and AFRINIC’s election fairness
Also read: Why AFRINIC’s election security needs stronger legal guarantees in Mauritius
The only lawful course
The only election conducted within AFRINIC’s constitutional framework remains that of June 2025. The dispute over one proxy vote should have been addressed through investigation and correction, not by annulling the result and dismantling members’ rights. Recognising the June results is the only lawful path to restore legitimacy.
Legitimacy cannot rest on convenience or expedience. AFRINIC’s governance demands adherence to bylaws, respect for member rights, and transparency in judicial oversight. Anything less undermines Mauritius’ constitutional strength and Africa’s role in the global internet community.
