Summary

  • AFRINIC opened its second consultation on the draft amended Constitution on 4 August; comments close on 21 August 2026 at 23:59 UTC.
  • The Constitution now in force ends at Article 23 and contains no governing-law or dispute-resolution article.
  • The draft adds Article 24, but Article 24.1 is only a note saying the insertion and rationale will be updated after external legal opinion and advice are received and considered.
  • AFRINIC says a final draft will later undergo independent external legal review before Board and member consideration; that safeguard comes after the present comment window.
  • Mauritius company law gives a constitution contract-like effect and permits a company to agree in writing to arbitration, making the missing scope, forum, costs and remedies consequential rather than editorial.

A precise deadline is attached to an unwritten rule

The consultation announcement is unambiguous. The Bylaws Review Committee released the second draft on 4 August 2026. Comments are due by 23:59 UTC on 21 August. The platform is meant to let readers inspect the current provision, the amendment, an explanation and public comments section by section.

Article 24 breaks that sequence. On page 43 of the draft, the heading reads “Governing Law and Dispute Resolution”. Beneath it, Article 24.1 contains a bracketed note: external legal opinion and advice have been sought; the proposed insertion and its rationale will be updated after that advice is received and considered. The explanatory section on page 53 repeats the same deferral. It supplies no clause to compare, annotate or test.

This is a new subject. AFRINIC's operative public Constitution lists 23 articles and ends at Article 23.9. There is no current Article 24 against which the placeholder can be read as a modest revision. The consultation therefore places a deadline on comments about a heading whose legal machinery remains absent.

That does not make the draft illegal, void or invalid. It makes Article 24 incomplete. Nor has the provision been adopted, implemented or used. Those distinctions matter because a news report should not turn an obvious sequencing problem into a legal judgment the evidence cannot support.

The promised legal review is real counterevidence—and it comes later

AFRINIC does describe safeguards after the consultation. It says the committee will consider the submissions and make revisions it considers appropriate. A final draft will then receive independent external legal review. Recommendations will go to the Board and, if approved there, to members at a Special General Members Meeting.

That chain is counterevidence to any suggestion that the placeholder is the final rule. It is not a clause members can examine before this deadline. The public draft identifies no adviser, questions, delivery date, fee, conflicts review or publication plan; the captured Board and resolution indexes show no identifiable Article 24 opinion. That limited public-record finding does not prove no private work exists.

A consultation can collect broad preferences before legal drafting. But this announcement invites section-by-section review of amendments and explanatory notes. A member cannot test a choice of Mauritian courts against arbitration, a public process against a confidential one, or a narrow membership dispute clause against a rule reaching resource contracts when none of those choices is on the page.

Company law shows why the blank is material

The Mauritius Companies Act does not leave a constitution as ceremonial copy. Section 43 says, subject to the Act, that a company constitution has the effect of a contract between the company and each member or shareholder, and among members or shareholders themselves. It is void only to the extent it conflicts with the Act.

Section 354 provides a separate arbitration route. A company may agree in writing—signed by its sole director or at least two directors where it has two or more—to refer an existing or future dispute with another company or person to arbitration under the Code of Civil Procedure. An arbitrator may receive power over matters the company or its governing body could lawfully settle.

Those provisions do not dictate what AFRINIC's Article 24 must say. They demonstrate why the choice cannot be reduced to a heading. The draft must decide, or deliberately leave untouched, questions such as:

  • which disputes, contracts and member classes it covers;
  • the governing law and whether claims go to court, arbitration, internal review or a staged combination;
  • who can preserve evidence and obtain urgent relief before a resource-affecting action takes effect;
  • forum, language, costs, confidentiality, publication, deadlines, appeals and remedies.

Mauritius law may supply defaults where a document is silent. Defaults do not tell members what allocation the drafters intend to create, displace or preserve.

Sources

Further reading