The future of African internet governance in the wake of CAIGA

• Experts warn that CAIGA risks shifting AFRINIC from bottom-up governance to state-centred oversight.
• ICANN faces scrutiny over funding and legitimising a blueprint that could reshape African internet regulation.

A region seeking stability amid institutional crisis

Africa’s Internet governance environment is entering a new phase as the continent reacts to the launch of the Continental Africa Internet Governance Architecture (CAIGA). Developed under the Smart Africa Alliance with support from ICANN and other partners, CAIGA was created as a continental coordination framework in response to the prolonged instability surrounding AFRINIC, the regional Internet registry responsible for allocating IP addresses across Africa.

Smart Africa argues that CAIGA provides “coordination and trust restoration” following AFRINIC’s years-long crisis, including litigation and the controversial annulment of the June 2025 board election over a single unverified proxy dispute. Critics, however, say it risks re-centralising a governance system that has historically depended on distributed, community-driven institutions. Professor Milton Mueller of the Internet Governance Project warns that the initiative may simply replace a technical governance crisis with a political one, creating new avenues for state influence.

Also Read: What Is Smart Africa’s CAIGA Initiative?

ICANN’s role under scrutiny

The creation of CAIGA has also prompted questions about the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Although ICANN states that its 2024 MoU and limited funding (including $40,000 for capacity-building) do not constitute endorsement of any change to RIR independence, critics describe its two-year collaboration and hosting of CAIGA sessions as having lent legitimacy to a process that many in the AFRINIC community felt excluded from.

Also Read: Is AFRINIC board working for Smart Africa? Fears of state-led capture

What CAIGA means for the continent’s digital future

For African network operators, the central question is whether CAIGA will enhance or weaken the region’s technical resilience. Supporters say it promises continental coordination and long-term stability. Critics counter that centralising authority within a political body increases the risk of government interference in IP address allocation — a core Internet function traditionally insulated from politics. See also: AfriNIC board faces legitimacy test.

The outcome will depend on CAIGA’s final governance model: whether it adopts a truly multistakeholder structure or becomes dominated by continental political coordination. African digital-rights groups warn that the latter could place national governments too close to the levers of Internet infrastructure.

As Africa expands broadband access, cloud infrastructure, and digital public services, the governance model it chooses now will shape the continent’s Internet landscape for decades. See also: AFRINIC crisis: when receiver becomes legal risk.