- AFRINIC suspended its 2025 board election over one unused proxy vote, sparking backlash from members and candidates who viewed the move as excessive and unjustified.
- Critics suspect the suspension may have been a strategic attempt to delay or influence the outcome, further damaging trust in AFRINIC’s electoral process.
AFRINIC’s 2025 board election was abruptly suspended after the discovery of a single suspicious proxy vote—one that was never even used. The move sparked backlash from community members, board candidates, and civil society observers, many of whom now question whether the suspension was truly about fairness or a calculated attempt to delay the outcome. Below is a breakdown of the incident in four key parts.
A proxy vote sparks a full election halt
AFRINIC, which manages Africa’s IP address resources, stopped the 2025 election after finding an irregular proxy vote. The vote appeared to come from an unauthorized source, but it was never cast. Instead of discarding the single vote, AFRINIC canceled the entire election.
The decision shocked many. Members had already voted, and campaigns had finished. The uncast vote did not affect results. Yet AFRINIC still chose to halt the process.
Also Read: The story of AFRINIC: How Africa’s internet ideal was destroyed from within
Also Read: AFRINIC staff violated obligations during 2025 election
A disproportionate and disruptive move
Community members and observers criticized the suspension. They argued that a single invalid proxy shouldn’t justify canceling a full regional election. AFRINIC could have removed the questionable vote and allowed the process to continue.
By canceling everything, the organization disrupted democratic participation. Candidates lost weeks of preparation. Voters saw their input discarded. Many now fear this sets a dangerous precedent for future elections.
Suspicions of political interference
The timing raised eyebrows. Several candidates suggested that AFRINIC used the ghost vote as an excuse to delay the outcome. Some believe this helped protect certain candidates or gave leadership more time to maneuver.
This isn’t the first time AFRINIC faced such concerns. Previous elections also drew criticism over transparency and internal interference. This latest incident deepens the perception of power struggles within the organization.
Rebuilding trust amid a crisis
The fallout from the election suspension has triggered a legitimacy crisis. Many AFRINIC members—ranging from ISPs to civil society actors—have demanded a clearer explanation. While AFRINIC cited procedural concerns, its public statement lacked detail, fueling even more speculation.
To restore trust, AFRINIC must now:
- Provide full transparency: The organization should release a detailed timeline and evidence regarding the ghost vote, including why it warranted a complete suspension.
- Set clear rules for contingencies: AFRINIC’s election policies need tighter definitions for what constitutes disqualification and what remedies apply in minor cases.
- Re-engage with members: AFRINIC must open channels of dialogue with members who feel alienated or disenfranchised.
If AFRINIC fails to act, it risks facing legal challenges from candidates or members, as well as long-term damage to its credibility as a democratic institution.
