A model-neutral legitimacy-under-stress framework for Internet governance institutions, RIRs, IXPs, national Internet councils, and externally influenced reform processes.

Author: Amin Dayekh
Version: 1 – Final Working Draft
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21278038
License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Publication type: Working Paper

Overview

The Internet is coordinated through institutions whose authority is neither purely sovereign nor purely private. Regional Internet Registries, ICANN-related structures, IANA/PTI functions, Internet Exchange Points, standards communities, national Internet councils, and other coordination bodies exercise functional authority over systems on which operators, governments, businesses, researchers, civil society, and users depend.

This working paper proposes The Governance Stress-Test Doctrine for Internet Institutions. The doctrine argues that Internet governance institutions hold authority on behalf of, and derive authority from, the communities they coordinate. Their legitimacy therefore cannot be presumed from legal existence, technical continuity, elections, external assistance, or institutional survival alone.

The doctrine rests on two central distinctions:

Continuity is not legitimacy.
An institution may remain technically operational while its authority, mandate, election process, or community trust is contested.

Assistance is not substitution.
External assistance is legitimate only while it supports the community’s own authority. It becomes a mandate substitution when external actors become the practical source of direction while the community remains only formally visible.

The paper acknowledges that ICP-2, the RIR Governance Document process, RIR accountability assessments, IANA numbering-service arrangements, and continuity mechanisms already address important operational and institutional questions. Its contribution is narrower: it defines a legitimacy-under-stress layer for situations where an Internet institution remains alive and operational while its authority, mandate, election legitimacy, external influence, reviewer integrity, or affected-community support becomes contested.

Key Themes

The working paper develops a governance stress-test based on traceable authority, bounded mandate, meaningful participation, capture resistance, conflict disclosure, emergency limits, technical continuity, external influence controls, remedial capacity, procedural traceability, reviewer legitimacy, and affected-community support.

It uses AFRINIC and APNIC as contrasting illustrations of institutional stress. AFRINIC is treated as a late-stage stress case involving litigation, emergency administration, continuity concerns, and regional/global effect. APNIC is treated as a preventive election-stress case involving by-law reform, candidate eligibility, corporate-group influence, geographic concentration, and electoral safeguards.

The framework also applies beyond RIRs to Internet Exchange Points, national Internet councils, IPv6 councils, digital-governance committees, and externally funded reform processes.

Download and Citation

The full working paper is archived on Zenodo and can be cited using the DOI below:

Amin Dayekh, The Governance Stress-Test Doctrine for Internet Institutions, Version 0.7, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21278038

Read / Download the full paper on Zenodo

Suggested Citation

Dayekh, Amin. The Governance Stress-Test Doctrine for Internet Institutions. Version 1.0 Final Working Draft. Zenodo, 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21278038