The power struggle over proxy voting in AFRINIC elections

• AFRINIC’s election crisis deepens as proxy voting dispute annuls member participation
• Cloud Innovation calls for registry wind-up, citing broken governance and unworkable standards

Proxy votes discarded in disputed election collapse

AFRINIC’s June 2025 board election was supposed to mark a turning point in the registry’s ongoing governance crisis. Instead, it ended in disarray after the organisation abruptly annulled the results over what it termed an “unverified proxy dispute.” Though the disputed proxy was just one among hundreds of submitted votes, AFRINIC scrapped the entire election outcome, rejecting legitimate participation from dozens of members and casting serious doubt on the registry’s internal processes.

This incident exemplified what critics have labelled AFRINIC’s “unworkable election standards.” Rather than resolving procedural disputes transparently, AFRINIC’s decision to discard all ballots further eroded trust in its democratic legitimacy. Proxy voting — long essential for members in remote or underserved regions — became collateral damage in a governance structure that no longer functions as intended. The registry’s capacity to uphold basic voting mechanisms has now come under sustained scrutiny, deepening its image as a “failed registry.”

Cloud Innovation calls democratic participation impossible

As AFRINIC’s third-largest member, Cloud Innovation initially supported the court-supervised election as a last attempt to restore order. But when the vote was annulled without resolving the underlying dispute, the company declared that a democratic process had become “impossible” under current conditions. In response, it issued a formal call to dissolve AFRINIC, calling the registry’s governance “irreparably broken” and urging a transition to delegate the IP duties to one of the existing RIRs.

Cloud Innovation stated that AFRINIC’s collapse is not a one-off failure but the result of systemic dysfunction, mismanagement, and years of failed reform. It has demanded that global internet coordination bodies “immediately appoint a successor RIR” to protect Africa’s IP resource management from further deterioration. To Cloud Innovation and a growing segment of members, AFRINIC’s structure no longer allows for legitimacy or accountability — a reset is the only viable path forward.

Also read: AFRINIC launches voter onboarding ahead of board election
Also read: AFRINIC election: 2nd attempt to delay voting fails

Kurt Lindqvist’s intervention sparks autonomy concerns

While some welcomed external monitoring of the elections, AFRINIC members grew uneasy when Kurt Lindqvist, the CEO of ICANN, appeared to guide discussions around future recognition of AFRINIC. His involvement — particularly around the ICP-2 compliance document — was seen by some observers as a consolidation of decision-making power in one office, raising alarms about regional autonomy.

Lindqvist’s firm stance on AFRINIC’s structural compliance came across as bypassing traditional multistakeholder deliberation. The resulting perception among several stakeholders was not of support but of overreach. Though not an official policy, his remarks suggested that continued recognition of AFRINIC was in question — a significant move given ICANN’s role as a coordinator rather than a governing body. The shift in tone unsettled members who view Africa’s internet governance as a bottom-up process.

Proxy voting dispute exposes deeper crisis of legitimacy

At the heart of this crisis is not a single disputed proxy vote but the broader failure of AFRINIC’s leadership to manage elections fairly, transparently, or functionally. Former and current directors have built a system so fragile that even one disagreement can paralyse governance and disenfranchise entire member blocs. The annulled election is just the latest chapter in a long decline.

Cloud Innovation’s wind-up proposal has now sparked wider debate: not about procedural reform, but about whether reform is even possible. With elections rendered non-viable, member trust broken, and no leadership accountability in sight, the registry’s collapse may be irreversible. Unless a successor model is introduced — one that ensures inclusivity and decentralisation — Africa’s IP address future remains hostage to a broken institution.