Browsing: Governance Bodies

Afrinic’s governance crisis highlights lessons from Mauritius, stressing law, autonomy, and risks of interference.

Mauritian civil society safeguards AFRINIC’s neutrality by opposing unconstitutional annulments and protecting true member-driven governance.

AFRINIC’s governance crisis shows why legal certainty and Lindqvist’s new policy moves matter for African internet governance.

AFRINIC’s collapse in Mauritius sparks a fight over democracy and community benefit, showing why constitutional clarity builds internet trust.

AFRINIC’s governance crisis exposes the dangers of opaque internet management, while open governance should be essential for emerging markets.

AFRINIC’s collapse and new powers from Kurt Lindqvist show how overregulation threatens Africa’s tech growth.

Politicizing internet access isolates communities, deepens inequality, and disrupts institutions—undermining Africa’s digital future.

AFRINIC’s collapse exposes tech’s role in aiding authoritarian control. Global silence risks normalising judicial defiance.

At the heart of Mauritius, AFRINIC’s collapse sparks a constitutional battle over democracy, control, and Africa’s IP resources future.

AFRINIC faces a governance vacuum, constitutional reform should strengthen accountability and safeguard Africa’s digital sovereignty.

Mauritius’ Constitution shields AFRINIC’s self-rule, but Lindqvist’s plan risks undermining regional autonomy.

Mauritius’s constitutional overreach over AFRINIC breeds instability and favors political control, endangering Africa’s internet governance.