Governance
AFRINIC election scandal: Staff caught removing ballots against bylaws
How the scandal unfolded during the 2025 AFRINIC election During the 23 June 2025 board election held in Mauritius, a member of AFRINIC’s election committee reportedly breached confidentiality by removing a Power of Attorney (PoA) from the ballot room. According to reports, this person then contacte…
Headline
How the scandal unfolded during the 2025 AFRINIC election During the 23 June 2025 board election held in Mauritius, a member of AFRINIC’s election committee reportedly breached confidentiality by removing a Power of Attorney (PoA) from the ballot room. According to reports, this…
Context
During the 23 June 2025 board election held in Mauritius, a member of AFRINIC’s election committee reportedly breached confidentiality by removing a Power of Attorney (PoA) from the ballot room. According to reports, this person then contacted a resource holder directly. Election bylaws clearly prohibit this behaviour, yet it occurred in full view of other committee members. This breach was one among several cited for halting the election. Simon Davenport KC, chair of the Nominating Committee, suspended proceedings after internal staff confirmed that ballots and proxy documents had been mishandled. Shortly after suspension, the court-appointed receiver, Gowtamsingh Dabee, annulled the vote pending a fresh election by 30 September.
Evidence
Pending intelligence enrichment.
Analysis
AFRINIC bylaws mandate strict confidentiality and non-disclosure by election committee members. Clause 4.6 states that members must sign a nondisclosure agreement before handling ballots. By removing a PoA and contacting a resource holder, the committee member broke this agreement. Additionally, the improper removal and alleged disappearance of PoA documentation undermines fair proxy voting. ISPA South Africa reported that some proxies were “mysteriously missing” from records, and in other cases more than 800 proxies were submitted for a membership database of fewer than 2,400. Insiders say confusion over proxy legitimacy prompted the staff member’s actions. An AFRINIC source noted that when challenged, the person contacted a resource holder who subsequently denied granting the PoA. However, critics argue that suspending the entire process over one incident was disproportionate. No public evidence has been released to suggest widespread tampering or fraud—though ICANN and ISPA have raised alarm over possible irregularities.
Key Points
- The Mauritian Ministry of ICT and police paused AFRINIC ’s private board election despite court oversight.
- Experts caution that the intervention may set a troubling precedent for government power over private entities.
Actions
Pending intelligence enrichment.
