- Mauritius Supreme Court issues emergency injunction halting a wide-scope investigation into AFRINIC by Puisne Judge Nicolas Ohsan-Bellepeau, citing potential breaches of the Companies Act.
- The suspension comes weeks before AFRINIC’s contested 29 August board election, intensifying political tensions and legal uncertainty in Africa’s internet governance landscape.
In a dramatic turn in the ongoing saga surrounding the African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC), a Supreme Court judge has issued an emergency injunction restraining Puisne Judge Nicolas Ohsan-Bellepeau from undertaking his recently mandated investigation into the organization. The decision comes just weeks before AFRINIC’s critical board election scheduled for August 29.
The injunction, issued this week, blocks Ohsan-Bellepeau from proceeding with his appointment as Special Inspector tasked with investigating AFRINIC, following a controversial proclamation by the Registrar of Companies in mid-July. The court order was prompted by an urgent application from stakeholders seeking to halt what they claim is an overreach of regulatory powers.
In granting the interim order, the Supreme Court underscored the immediacy of the situation, stating it was “satisfied that the matter is so urgent as to require the immediate intervention of an honourable judge.” The court has scheduled a hearing for August 13, at which point the respondents — Judge Ohsan-Bellepeau and the Registrar of Companies Prabha Divanandum Chinien — must appear to show cause as to why the order should not be extended.
Also read: EXPOSED: The letter that reveals who was really benefitting from AFRINIC’s lawsuits
Also read: AFRINIC elections 2025: Everything you need to know
Broad scope of inspection raises legal red flags
Central to the dispute is the scope of the mandate issued to Judge Ohsan-Bellepeau. The complainants argue that the investigation, as currently framed, exceeds the legal limits set out in Part XV of the Mauritian Companies Act, which governs the appointment and conduct of company inspections.
In response, the court issued specific prohibitions:
- Ohsan-Bellepeau is “restrained and prohibited… from undertaking an inspection pursuant to the mandate given to him by respondent no 2,” i.e., the Registrar of Companies.
- The Registrar is, in turn, “restrained and prohibited… from appointing and mandating any inspector to undertake any investigation which exceeds or is in breach of Part XV of the Companies Act.”
- Both respondents are “restrained… from doing any acts or omissions to give effect to the mandate as presently couched in the Proclamation in furtherance to any inspection.”
The implications are significant. Not only does the order pause the inspection, it also casts a legal shadow over the authority of the Registrar of Companies to pursue such a wide-ranging inquiry into AFRINIC without more narrowly defined parameters.
Also read: Cloud Innovation supports ICANN’s move to derecognise AFRINIC, calls for successor to be immediately identified
Also read: Did ICANN’s lawyer illegally visit AFRINIC when the Official Receiver was away?
Political undertones ahead of election
The timing of the attempted inspection — and now, its suspension — is conspicuous. AFRINIC, which allocates IP address resources across Africa, is preparing for a board election on August 29 that could reshape its leadership after years of legal and administrative paralysis.
The organization has faced increasing scrutiny and political pressure, particularly in Mauritius, where it is registered. The appointment of a Supreme Court judge to investigate AFRINIC raised eyebrows in regional internet governance circles, not only due to the high-profile nature of the inspector, but also because of the sweeping language used in the proclamation issued by the Registrar.
Judge Ohsan-Bellepeau, who was appointed on July 25 by the President of Mauritius, Dharambeer Gokhool, was tasked with inspecting AFRINIC’s governance, compliance, and operations. His mandate, however, lacked specificity regarding the time frame, scope, and statutory boundaries of the investigation — a point now at the heart of the legal challenge.
Also read: AFRINIC designated a ‘declared company’ by Prime Minister of Mauritius Also read: The story of AFRINIC: How Africa’s internet ideal was destroyed from within
AFRINIC’s fragile recovery
AFRINIC has been attempting to regain operational stability after nearly three years of institutional crisis. Since 2021, the organization has been embroiled in legal battles over board legitimacy, alleged mismanagement, and contested IP allocations. Most notably, a long-running dispute with Cloud Innovation Ltd resulted in frozen bank accounts and court-imposed restrictions that stalled AFRINIC’s ability to function.
In June 2025, AFRINIC managed to conduct a partial election to reconstitute part of its Board of Directors, a move that was hailed as a first step toward institutional recovery. However, the process was marred by allegations of procedural irregularities, competing interpretations of eligibility rules, and heavy scrutiny from various stakeholders, including governments, civil society, and private sector actors across the continent.
The upcoming August 29 election is hotly debated, with some parties arguing it is an illegal election being conducted on spurious formalities. If it goes ahead, the outcome could determine whether AFRINIC reclaims its position as a credible regional registry or continues to spiral in legal limbo.
A governance flashpoint
The injunction halting Judge Ohsan-Bellepeau’s inspection represents yet another flashpoint in the contested terrain of internet governance in Africa. AFRINIC, as one of five Regional Internet Registries globally, plays a vital role in managing internet resources, and its operations directly affect the digital sovereignty of over 50 countries on the continent.
The court’s interim order underscores the precarious legal and political environment in which the organization now operates. The hearing on August 13 will be closely watched not only by legal experts and internet governance advocates but also by those vying for influence in AFRINIC’s boardroom at the end of the month.
Whether this judicial intervention marks a course correction or a further descent into dysfunction remains to be seen.
