What AFRINIC reveals about Internet governance transparency

• AFRINIC’s opaque receivership and annulled elections highlight systemic failures.
• Transparency collapse fuels mistrust and calls for external reform.

Opacity entrenches dysfunction in AFRINIC

The African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC), established in 2005 to manage IP address allocation across Africa, is now widely seen as a failed registry. Its receivership, annulled elections and refusal to disclose information to members have turned it into a cautionary example of how secrecy undermines governance.

In June 2025, AFRINIC annulled its board election over a single proxy dispute, discarding valid votes and breaching its own bylaws. Observers say this decision, made under a court-appointed receiver, lacked legal justification and further destabilised the registry. Reports in ICT News Africa and CircleID describe AFRINIC as “non-functional,” pointing to years of paralysis under judicial and political interference.

Also read: Why AFRINIC members should refuse to participate in this flawed election

Transparency lost, trust destroyed

Transparency is the cornerstone of the multistakeholder model endorsed by global internet bodies such as ICANN. AFRINIC’s opaque handling of elections, refusal to clarify member data use, and disregard for court limits show how quickly that trust can collapse. Instead of publishing clear reports or engaging openly with members, AFRINIC has normalised secrecy.

The situation was aggravated by the Smart Africa leak, where thousands of AFRINIC member emails were exposed without consent. That breach, still unanswered, raised serious doubts about privacy and accountability. For many, AFRINIC’s silence illustrates an organisation unwilling—or unable—to protect its own community.

Cloud Innovation, AFRINIC’s third-largest member, has argued that the registry’s behaviour amounts to “dictatorship disguised as governance.” It has called for AFRINIC’s dissolution under ICP-2, the global standard for recognising Regional Internet Registries. ICP-2 requires transparency, accountability and bottom-up participation—criteria AFRINIC is now widely seen as failing.

Also read: Smart Africa leaks thousands of AFRINIC member email addresses
Also read: Special report: Smart Africa leaked email list was obtained without consent

A cautionary tale for global internet governance

AFRINIC’s collapse is not just a regional failure. The Number Resource Organization (NRO), which represents all five RIRs, has stressed that trust in the global internet’s numbering system depends on the integrity of every registry. When one RIR falls to secrecy and political capture, confidence in the entire decentralised model is undermined. Its trajectory—from rise to collapse—shows how failures of openness in one registry can destabilise global internet governance.