The dark side of AFRINIC IP address leasing and brokering

AFRINIC’s election halt over one proxy vote exposed weak procedures, deepening distrust in its IP leasing and brokering governance.

AFRINIC suspended its board election over one disputed proxy vote, revealing procedure flaws that shook member confidence.
The incident intensified scrutiny on AFRINIC’s IP leasing and brokering governance amid resource misallocation fears.

A fragile process exposed

AFRINIC’s board election on June 23, 2025, in Mauritius was suspended just before polls closed, after the Nomination Committee raised a procedural concern over a proxy submission. Instead of resolving the matter post-vote, AFRINIC halted the entire election—effectively discarding over 800 proxy ballots. The organization’s own charter permits proxy voting with clear rules, but the decision exposed how a single process dispute can disable a fundamental governance mechanism.

The reaction sparked intense backlash. The South African Interne t Service Providers’ Association (ISPA) filed a police complaint in Mauritius demanding full transparency on proxy assignments. ICANN followed with a letter urging AFRINIC to permit independent investigation. Critics described the suspension not as a defense of integrity, but as a signal of systemic fragility—where procedures lack the resilience to handle minor disputes without institutional collapse.

Also Read: Cloud Innovation calls for AFRINIC wind-up
Also Read: A system built to silence: AFRINIC refuses to hear from the edges of Africa

IP leasing governance under fire

The election debacle surfaced amid AFRINIC’s deeper struggles over IP resource management. Since 2020, AFRINIC has been in litigation with Cloud Innovation Ltd over the reclaiming of 6.9 million IPv4 addresses—worth over USD 87 million. The lawsuit led to a court-imposed receivership, frozen bank accounts, and the suspension of new IP allocations. Many African network operators were left unable to access much-needed resources.

Internal audits revealed that an additional 4.1 million addresses had been misclassified or informally leased without full documentation. Investigations pointed to a lack of oversight and the rise of unofficial brokering by former staff. Though not formally illegal, these practices operated in regulatory blind spots and undermined AFRINIC’s credibility.

The accumulation of unresolved issues—from leasing opacity to procedural collapses—has left AFRINIC facing a full-scale governance crisis. Members and observers now question whether the organization, as it stands, can continue to function as Africa’s regional Internet registry without deep structural reform.

Systemic reforms urgently needed

Following the twin crises, stakeholders demanded meaningful reform. ISPA requested the creation of an independent audit of AFRINIC’s proxy protocols. ICANN considered imposing compliance requirements. Community members called for a clear separation between IP brokering practices and formal allocation channels, as well as stronger oversight for proxy verification.

Even some board members privately admitted the crises signalled deep-rooted governance flaws that must be addressed. They proposed measures like third-party validation for proxy votes, blockchain tracing of IP transactions, and a member oversight council.

But implementation remains uncertain. AFRINIC already faces legal costs and reputational damage, which limits capacity to reform swiftly. Meanwhile, its role as Africa’s regional Internet registry is under scrutiny—members warn that without transparent, resilient governance, the organization risks losing legitimacy.