Summary

  • AFRINIC's August announcement names a CEO Designate, not a chief executive already in office. It was issued by the board and receiver together.
  • Court orders, the published constitution and the membership agreement explain different parts of the transition. None, on its own, answers every question about a contested decision.

If AFRINIC sends a member notice that it intends to terminate their agreement, its published contract gives that member 30 days to put forward grounds against termination. A network operator facing such a notice would need to know the reason, the response deadline and who will decide what happens next. The arrival of a new chief executive next year would not answer those questions today.

Mike Silber is due to take office on 1 January 2027, according to the appointment notice published on 24 August. He is CEO Designate, not yet the serving chief executive. The board appointed him with the receiver's consent, and both issued the notice. AFRINIC had announced eight elected directors almost a year earlier. Why did this decision still involve a court-appointed official?

The answer matters beyond the people occupying offices. IANA lists AFRINIC as the regional internet registry for Africa. Its work includes allocating internet number resources and maintaining records used by network operators. Those operators encounter the institution through applications, requests for information and membership terms. Behind each is a division of responsibility that a recruitment announcement cannot replace.

Three roles, not one empty chair

The published 2020 constitution gives these questions recognisable answers. Article 15 puts the direction and supervision of the business with the board. Its powers include budgets, expenditure limits and specified fee decisions. Article 17 gives directors the power to appoint the chief executive, who manages the day-to-day business and reports to them.

The membership has a different role. Registered and Resource Members have voting rights, including approval of constitutional changes by special resolution. Associate Members attend as observers. Participation in AFRINIC's wider community is therefore not identical to holding a corporate vote. Nor does the board's supervisory role make resource policy its private preserve: article 15.3 ties allocation guidelines to the member-driven policy development process.

For a member trying to change a rule, the distinction changes where the effort goes. A proposal about resource allocation belongs in a policy process; a change to the constitution needs the relevant members' approval. Persuading the new chief executive would not, by itself, accomplish either. The organisation has several ways to make a decision, not just one vacant chair to fill.

There is also a published board, rather than a blank list of officeholders. The official election announcement of 12 September 2025 names eight successful candidates. The current board page identifies Emmanuel Adewale Adedokun as chairman and Abdelaziz Hilali as vice-chairman. That is evidence of the institution's declared leadership. It is not a court judgment disposing of every challenge to its actions.

Why the receiver appears beside the board

The court record explains how receivership became part of this structure. In its 12 September 2023 judgment, the Supreme Court of Mauritius appointed the Official Receiver with tasks including preserving the company's assets and business value, arranging constitution-compliant board elections and appointing a chief executive. The order specified powers and an initial timetable; it did not merely create a ceremonial observer.

A 12 February 2025 order ended the Official Receiver's appointment and appointed Gowtamsingh Dabee, directing compliance with the earlier judgment. Those documents establish particular steps in the receivership. Their original deadlines are historical, not a fresh promise about when today's transition will end.

Then, on 5 September 2025, a judge declined the interim restraint sought against the election, reconstitution of the board and appointment of a chief executive. The order directed that the 12 September election proceed under the supervision of the Electoral Commissioner. The election results followed a week later.

This sequence is more informative than either of two sweeping stories: that no authority exists, or that the election settled everything. The orders dealt with defined applications and tasks. The August 2026 appointment notice still records the receiver's consent. No later judgment settling all governance disputes was verified for this report; the absence of such verification is not a finding that no later order exists.

The rules are being discussed as well as the appointments

The transition also includes a debate about the constitution itself. AFRINIC opened a second consultation on proposed amendments in August 2026. A third-round notice on 25 August kept submissions open until 30 August and said the review committee was considering stronger safeguards around the board's power to terminate resource membership.

That is a consequential subject for a registry's customers. The published English registration service agreement, dated 27 November 2017, already sets out a notice-and-response procedure for proposed termination. Clause 11 provides for written notice and an opportunity to answer or remedy a breach, with 30 days to put forward grounds against termination. This describes the agreement's wording, not a finding that the procedure was followed in any particular case.

The committee's consultation did not itself replace the constitution. Nor can its announcement of confidential legal advice tell outsiders what that advice concluded. A draft, an adopted rule and a decision applying that rule are three separate things.

The member with a deadline needs a usable answer, not a theory about the entire registry. That is also a useful test of the transition: can a member identify the rule, the decision-maker and the route for a response? No individual member file was examined for this report, so it does not pronounce on how a particular case was handled. It does show why January's arrival will be only one milestone. The handover has to make sense in the decisions members receive, as well as in the welcome given to a new chief.

Correction and update, 24 October 2026: The earlier version drew unsupported conclusions about authority, standing and commercial consequences from incomplete records and unsuccessful document retrievals. This report replaces those conclusions with the published constitution, election announcement, court instruments and membership terms. The original URL, publication date and access level are retained.