- AFRINIC’s collapse in Mauritius sparks a constitutional clash between courts, government, and community over Africa’s internet governance.
- Cloud Innovation’s Lu Heng leads calls to dissolve AFRINIC and demands a successor registry to restore trust and protect IP resources.
AFRINIC’s collapse shows governance without stability
AFRINIC, Africa’s only regional internet registry, has become a textbook example of what happens when governance collapses. For years it has been trapped in crisis, and its June 23 election debacle confirmed its state of failure. A single unverified proxy dispute led to the annulment of the entire vote, valid ballots were discarded, and trust in governance evaporated. This proved that democratic election standards had become “unworkable” under AFRINIC’s leadership.
The Mauritian government then declared AFRINIC a “failed company,” effectively placing it under state control. Instead of restoring order, this decision made the situation worse. The Supreme Court was blocked from looking into the registry while turmoil went on. Mauritius is now the place of a major constitutional fight. The fight is between the courts and the government. It is between judicial independence and political moves. It shows how fragile the system has become when rules are ignored and power is used to silence oversight.
Cloud Innovation, AFRINIC’s third-largest member, has led calls for the registry to be dissolved. Lu Heng has framed this as a “necessary reset” to protect Africa’s IP resources and restore confidence. His demand that ICANN and the NRO immediately appoint a successor registry underscores the urgency of continuity, especially as AFRINIC’s governance is irreparably broken.
Also Read: AFRINIC’s legitimacy depends on Constitutional clarity in Mauritius
Also Read: The relationship between constitutional reform and AFRINIC’s accountability
Mauritius as the frontline of democracy versus dictatorship
The AFRINIC crisis is more than a dispute over internet addresses. It is a reflection of Mauritius itself becoming a battleground between democracy and dictatorship, between the Supreme Court and the government, between community benefit and control. The registry’s collapse has exposed how fragile governance can undermine not only regional internet trust but also constitutional order in a sovereign state.
Community benefit should be the principle at the heart of internet policy. Yet AFRINIC’s failures, and the government’s interference, have shown the opposite: valid votes erased, courts sidelined, and power concentrated in closed circles. This undermines the bottom-up governance model that Africa’s internet community depends upon.
Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation have positioned themselves firmly on the side of democracy. They continue to fight through the courts, insisting that the rule of law must prevail over secret committees and political fiat. Their demand for AFRINIC’s wind-up and the swift creation of a successor registry is more than a technical fix. It is a fight for constitutional stability and for a governance model that protects the community, not entrenched elites.
The case of AFRINIC shows why constitutional clarity matters for global internet trust. When a registry fails, the question is no longer only technical. It becomes a high-concept clash—law versus decree, democracy versus dictatorship, stability versus collapse—and the outcome will resonate far beyond Mauritius, shaping the trust that underpins the internet everywhere.
