AFRINIC under the microscope: Did ICANN CEO exploit a crisis?

AFRINIC under the microscope: Did ICANN CEO exploit a crisis? is profiled by BTW Media because published evidence links it to internet infrastructure, governance, operational dependencies, or market visibility.

• ICANN faces backlash for bypassing courts and pushing global agenda
• AFRINIC’s collapse exposes fragility of Africa’s internet governance

What happened: AFRINIC’s governance implodes

AFRINIC, Africa’s regional internet registry (RIR), has entered a state of collapse after years of governance crises, failed elections, and courtroom battles. Once responsible for distributing IP addresses across the continent, the registry has become a symbol of institutional breakdown.

But in the vacuum left by AFRINIC’s dysfunction, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) — a US-based nonprofit that oversees global internet coordination — has taken controversial steps that critics say amount to a quiet power grab.

The situation escalated in January 2025, when a lawyer representing ICANN appeared unannounced at AFRINIC’s headquarters in Mauritius to retrieve a confidential document. While ICANN’s CEO Kurtis Lindqvist has remained vague about its intentions, observers say the move reflects its growing interventionist posture, despite local courts still presiding over AFRINIC’s affairs.

Tensions peaked when Lindqvist announced a new “interim solution” for AFRINIC’s leadership — ignoring a Mauritian court-approved election process and invalidating its outcome over a disputed proxy vote. The annulment of the 23 June 2024 election over a single unverified proxy ballot discarded valid votes, exposing what critics call AFRINIC’s “unworkable election standards” and further eroding trust in its governance.

Instead of supporting regional processes, Lindqvist is now being accused of trying to “pick AFRINIC’s leaders”, a move seen as an over-extension of its reach and a blow to Africa’s bottom-up internet governance model.

Underlying this is ICANN’s controversial ICP-2 compliance document — a little-publicised policy that grants it the power to de-recognise regional internet registries. Adopted without public consultation, ICP-2 bypassed ICANN’s own multistakeholder mechanisms, marking a serious departure from its long-touted governance model.

Also Read: ICANN’s ‘failure’ and ‘hypocrisy’ highlighted by expert as WSIS+20 starts
Also Read: Did ICANN’s lawyer illegally visit AFRINIC when the Official Receiver was away?

Why it’s important

ICANN’s actions in Africa mark a turning point in the global internet governance landscape. Once a neutral technical coordinator, it is now seen as a body that is losing control, increasingly reliant on centralised decisions, and willing to undermine regional courts to impose order.

Critics argue that Lindqvist is exploiting AFRINIC’s governance crisis to consolidate his influence on the continent. Instead of supporting recovery under African legal oversight, ICANN appears to be advancing a global agenda that sidelines local autonomy — and, by extension, Africa’s ability to control its own digital future.

AFRINIC’s collapse is already causing ripple effects: there is no longer a trusted authority to manage IP allocations in Africa, raising serious risks to connectivity, routing security, and the continent’s broader digital infrastructure. The legal battles, combined with governance irreparably broken, have made AFRINIC an unreliable institution.

Yet Lindqvist’s response has only deepened the crisis. The backtracking on threats to de-recognise AFRINIC — a position it walked back following community outrage — suggests a manipulative, shifting strategy. Stakeholders now fear this could set a dangerous precedent for other RIRs, where ICANN may impose compliance without accountability.

At stake is more than just AFRINIC — it’s the credibility of ICANN’s multistakeholder governance, and whether the global internet remains decentralised, transparent, and accountable to the communities it serves.

Unless Lindqvist reins in his over-extension and defers to local judicial processes, the crisis in Africa may be only the beginning.