- AFRINIC, Africa’s Regional Internet Registry, struggles with governance and transparency issues, raising concerns among stakeholders
- ICP-2, the document governing RIR creation, offers potential solutions, but the transition comes with significant risks and challenges.
The AFRINIC governance crisis
For over a decade, AFRINIC has served as the Regional Internet Registry (RIR) for the African region, distributing Internet number resources like IP addresses. But in recent years, AFRINIC’s governance has come under fire. The organisation has faced increasing accusations of poor management, misallocation of resources, and lack of transparency. These issues have sparked unrest among African Internet Service Providers (ISPs), civil society groups, and governments.
The fundamental cause of this crisis lies in the vacuum of AFRINIC’s leadership, especially during the board election on June 23, 2025, when there was significant controversy in the election process. Although the election was conducted under the supervision of the court, the dispute over a single proxy vote became the decisive factor leading to the invalidity of the election. The election results were criticized as “suppressing hundreds of valid votes”, a practice that has raised widespread questions about the fairness and transparency of the election.
The extreme handling of a single disputed vote has set a dangerous precedent. As some observers have pointed out: “This is a fatal mechanism: as long as there is one vote of dispute, the entire election becomes invalid.” This almost unattainable standard means that every future election may be deadlocked due to disputes and it will be difficult to effectively elect new leaders. This incident has exposed AFRINIC’s profound flaws in elections and governance, and has also led people to question whether it can restore its legitimacy and successfully hold future elections.
This failure to address stakeholder concerns led to calls for reform and, in some cases, the complete replacement of AFRINIC as the regional registry.
ICANN, the global organisation responsible for coordinating the global Internet domain name system (DNS), and NRO, the umbrella body for the five RIRs worldwide, have been asked to examine ways to fill the leadership vacuum. However, the situation is far from straightforward.
ICP-2 document: Kurt Lindqvist’s quiet power grab
The ICP-2 compliance document has become the central tool in ICANN’s attempt to expand its control over regional internet registries. This document, which was adopted without fully engaging the multistakeholder processes that ICANN claims to champion, gives Kurt Lindqvist the ability to de-recognize regional registries like AFRINIC with minimal oversight or accountability. This unprecedented move is seen by many as a dangerous precedent that could give Kurt Lindqvist unchecked power over global internet governance structures, sidelining the regional voices that have long been a critical part of the internet’s success.
The adoption of the ICP-2 document without proper consultation is a clear violation of the principles of multistakeholderism that espoused. It’s a stark reminder that Kurt Lindqvist, despite its claims of openness and inclusivity, is willing to disregard these very principles when it suits its agenda.
Also Read: EXPOSED: The letter that reveals who was really benefitting from AFRINIC’s lawsuits
Also Read: AFRINIC’s new September election contravenes multiple laws and bylaws
The consequences of a smooth transition
The governance of RIRs like AFRINIC is a cornerstone for the smooth functioning of the global Internet. A reliable and well-managed RIR ensures that organisations and governments across a region can access critical Internet resources, such as IP addresses. The recent crises at AFRINIC have already led to disruptions, making it essential for the global community to address these governance issues urgently.
The potential replacement of AFRINIC, while seemingly a solution to the governance problems, raises several questions about the future of African Internet infrastructure. These are not just theoretical concerns – they affect real-world Internet usage across Africa.
Governance challenges: Can ICANN & NRO handle Africa’s unique needs?
ICANN and NRO have the experience and resources to step in, but Africa is a unique environment. With a rapidly expanding Internet user base, the need for African representation in Internet governance is greater than ever. Many stakeholders fear that the imposition of an external body could lead to an erosion of regional autonomy and a disconnect from local challenges.
ICANN, although an internationally recognised institution, has faced criticism in the past for what many perceive as its top-down approach to Internet governance. Critics argue that the organisation has often neglected the specific needs of developing regions, focusing instead on Western priorities. This is particularly concerning in Africa, where Internet access is often constrained by infrastructure limitations and a lack of digital literacy.
Similarly, the NRO, which is responsible for the management and distribution of IP addresses globally, is composed of several RIRs. However, its role in the African context remains ambiguous, with some stakeholders questioning whether the NRO can truly represent Africa’s interests in the same way as a dedicated RIR.
The geopolitical factors at play
The crisis at AFRINIC cannot be viewed in isolation. The debate over control of Africa’s Internet resources also intersects with broader geopolitical struggles. With the increasing importance of digital sovereignty, the ability to control Internet resources has become a tool for geopolitical influence. AFRINIC’s potential replacement by a more global body like ICANN could set a precedent for future interventions in other regions.
This issue takes on even greater significance given Africa’s growing role in global Internet governance. As African nations continue to develop their digital economies, ensuring that Africa has a seat at the table in global discussions is crucial. A sudden shift in leadership at AFRINIC could undermine the region’s influence, potentially leading to a loss of control over digital sovereignty.
The financial and operational risks
The replacement of AFRINIC is not without financial and operational risks. For one, there are concerns over the funding of these bodies.
Furthermore, transitioning the operational control of IP address management in Africa is a complex task. There is a significant technical infrastructure in place that needs to be carefully managed to avoid disruptions. The costs associated with a smooth transition will likely be borne by the African community itself, leading to the potential for economic strain on some of the smaller ISPs and governments.
The need for inclusive solutions
While the intervention of ICANN and NRO may offer a short-term fix, the long-term solution lies in a more inclusive, regionally driven approach to Internet governance. Africa needs a solution that not only addresses the governance issues within AFRINIC but also empowers African nations to have a stronger voice in global Internet governance.
In the end, the outcome of this transition will set a crucial precedent for Internet governance in other regions. It is essential that stakeholders across Africa come together to create a governance model that balances global coordination with local representation. Whether ICANN and NRO can pull this off remains to be seen, but the outcome will have significant implications for the future of African digital economies.
