In most places in the Caribbean, if you are not beyond dark brown; you are not considered African.
Some times a mixed person is identified with the ethnicity that is other than african; for example Chinese. It has been a standard for things Euro and or not black or African to be treated with status and prestige. This no doubt, includes skin color. This type of institutional socialisation makes no one wanting to call themself African. Under Brutish Colonialism, people of such a light shade, as Dr. Ikel were called colored. However after independence, most of them were refered to as red or "local Whites". In other words, they might have African ancestry, but they mainly look by appearance white and marry white or light skin people. They most definitely also ascribe to Euro cultural conventions and institutions. Under colonialism, ignorance was so pervasive that ones have been physically attacked by obvious African looking people; due to the label African being applied to them.

I don't think it is a matter of scorn, but authenticity, because in Barbados Dr. Ikel is considered a "local White". But the commission which he heads is Panafrican. So, in the populace's eyes, he is not reflective of who they consider being African or Black.

N.B. People who are considered Black in the US are viewed as Brown in the Caribbean. In some places you could call it coloracracy where shades of complexion define role, status and prestige in the society. Most of us Know the saying: If yuh black, stay back. If yuh brown, stick around. If yuh white, yuh alright. I think what you would term affirmative action is needed.