Who controls the internet in Africa? The AFRINIC vs. Cloud Innovation case explained

Who controls the internet in Africa? The AFRINIC vs.

• AFRINIC’s governance collapse and legal battles have raised urgent questions about who controls internet resources in Africa.
• Cloud Innovation’s push for ICP-2 compliance highlights the struggle between regional autonomy and centralised global oversight.

A registry in crisis and the stakes for Africa

AFRINIC, the Regional Internet Registry responsible for Africa’s IP address management, has descended into prolonged governance failure. Legal disputes, financial disruptions, and internal collapse led Mauritius’s Supreme Court to place the organisation under receivership in 2022. Board elections were annulled, and the registry has lacked both leadership and institutional stability.

This breakdown threatens not just AFRINIC, but Africa’s ability to govern its own digital infrastructure. Without a functional registry, the continent risks external influence over its IP resources and compromised digital sovereignty.

Also Read: Cloud Innovation supports ICANN’s move to derecognise AFRINIC, calls for successor to be immediately identified
Also Read: Why Cloud Innovation’s stand in Mauritius matters for the entire internet

Cloud Innovation’s legal stand and its broader implications

Cloud Innovation, Africa’s third-largest AFRINIC member, challenged this breakdown by filing for court-supervised liquidation—arguing that AFRINIC is structurally broken and unable to fairly govern. They insist an existing RIR (not a brand-new one) should assume AFRINIC’s duties under ICP-2. Meanwhile, AFRINIC’s legal campaign backfired: over 50 unsuccessful lawsuits led to the freezing of its own accounts. These events underscore how poor governance can threaten internet management continuity, revealing the dangers of unchecked internal failure.

The broader power play: Regional control and global oversight

The core of the dispute extends beyond technical management—it’s a battle for control. Cloud Innovation’s embrace of ICP-2 transitions preserves regional autonomy. Yet ICANN, via CEO Kurt Lindqvist, pushed a new compliance document granting power to derecognize RIRs altogether. That move signals a potential shift from bottom-up governance toward centralized oversight—a significant concern for regional decision-making on internet matters.

Also read: ICANN, Cloud Innovation & the limits of legal mandates in Africa’s RIR
Also read: AFRINIC vs Cloud Innovation: Who has the upper hand legally?

What it means for internet governance across Africa

The outcome of this conflict will resonate far beyond Mauritius or AFRINIC. If AFRINIC collapses undeniably—or if control shifts under ICP-2 without transparency—it could set a precedent for the centralized reallocation of internet governance rights. Conversely, Cloud Innovation’s legal success highlights the resilience of community members willing to push back against institutional failure.

At stake is whether the internet in Africa remains governed by its users or becomes subject to distant control—and that question now turns on lawful resistance and institutional reform.