Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Blog

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Blog
18Apr

Apply To The Latest Round of the Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF)

Author CIPESA Posted on

Announcement |

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) is calling for proposals to support digital rights work across Africa. The current call is particularly interested in proposals for work related to:

  • Data governance including aspects of data localisation, cross-border data flows, biometric databases and digital ID
  • Digital resilience for human rights defenders, other activists and journalists
  • Censorship and network disruptions
  • Digital economy
  • Digital inclusion including aspects of accessibility for persons with disabilities
  • Disinformation
  • Online violence against women
  • Platform accountability

Grant amounts available range between USD 1,000 and USD 10,000, depending on the need and scope of the proposed intervention. Cost-sharing is strongly encouraged and the grant period should not exceed six months. Applications will be accepted until May 5, 2023.

This call for proposals is the seventh under CIPESA’s Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF) initiative which provides rapid response and flexible grants to organisations and networks to implement activities that promote digital rights, including advocacy, litigation, research, policy analysis, skills development and movement building. Since its launch in April 2019, the ADRF has to-date supported 52 initiatives with a total sum of USD 649,000 across 39 African countries and contributed to building capacity and traction for digital rights advocacy on the continent. 

Highlights of ADRF-supported initiatives

Application Guidelines

Geographical Coverage

The ADRF is open to organisations/networks based or operational in Africa and with interventions covering any country on the continent.

Size of Grants

Grant size shall range from USD 1,000 to USD 10,000. Cost sharing is strongly encouraged.

Eligible Activities

The activities that are eligible for funding are those that protect and advance digital rights. These may include but are not limited to research, advocacy, engagement in policy processes, litigation, digital literacy and digital security skills building.

Duration

The grant funding shall be for a period not exceeding six months.

Eligibility Requirements

  • The Fund is open to organisations and coalitions working to advance digital rights in Africa. This includes but is not limited to human rights defenders, media, activists, think tanks, legal aid groups, and tech hubs. Entities working on women’s rights, or with youth, sexual minorities, refugees, and persons with disabilities are strongly encouraged to apply.
  • The initiatives to be funded will preferably have formal registration in an African country, but in some circumstances organisations and coalitions that do not have formal registration may be considered. Such organisations need to show evidence that they are operational in a particular African country or countries.
  • The activities to be funded must be in/on an African country or countries.

Ineligible Activities

  • The Fund shall not fund any activity that does not directly advance digital rights.
  • The Fund will not support travel to attend conferences or workshops, except in exceptional circumstances where such travel is directly linked to an activity that is eligible.
  • Costs that have already been incurred are ineligible.
  • The Fund shall not provide scholarships.
  • The Fund shall not support equipment or asset acquisition.

Administration

The Fund is administered by CIPESA. An internal and external panel of experts will make decisions on beneficiaries based on the following criteria:

  • If the proposed intervention fits within the Fund’s digital rights priorities.
  • The relevance to the given context/country.
  • Commitment and experience of the applicant in advancing digital rights.
  • Potential impact of the intervention on digital rights policies or practices.

The deadline for submissions is Friday May 5, 2023. The application form can be accessed here.

14Apr

Digital Democracy in Africa: What Has the Law Got to Do With It?

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Edrine Wanyama |

With digital freedoms continuing to take a hit amidst a wider democratic regression across Africa, the role of laws in curing what ails democracy in the region warrants scrutiny. In a number of countries, the laws that regulate how citizens use digital platforms and exercise their digital rights are retrogressive and fail to offer sufficient protection to citizens. Many of them are broadly worded, give extensive powers to state agencies to interpret the laws and to interfere with citizens’ rights.

In turn, the legal and regulatory framework has become central in shaping digital rights and digital democracy in Africa. Governments have enacted regressive and draconian laws that variously empower state agencies to limit the digital civic space. As a result, rights such as freedom of expression, access to information, and data privacy continue to come under threat due to the high-handed and often excessive control measures. 

In many countries laws have been weaponised to silence critics, notably those that use digital and social media to organise or express opinions critical of governments and state officials. Various laws are being used to arrest, persecute, detain and prosecute individuals over online communication, as have been witnessed in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Mozambique, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe and several other countries. These measures curtail press freedom and other digital rights that are at the root of democratic participation.

Laws that regulate state surveillance are among those that have a profound chilling effect on digital rights and citizen participation. Anonymous communication in the digital domain is crucial for citizens, journalists and political actors to operate without fear of reprisals, particularly in authoritarian countries. Yet the conduct of surveillance in the region is enabled by laws that give broad powers to state agencies to conduct surveillance amidst limited oversight and transparency, and strenuous demands on intermediaries to facilitate communications monitoring and interception.

Equally concerning is that various governments have weaponised disinformation laws to silence critical voices, rather than utilising them to counter the ills of disinformation. Similar to the purposes that state surveillance often serves, laws on countering disinformation have in many cases been used to target political critics.

In turn, those laws (which tend to be vague and ambiguous and fail to distinguish between disinformation or falsified information, making their enforcement open to the subjective interpretation of law enforcement agencies) are being used to stifle legitimate expression and to hamper access to critical and pluralistic information. This has been common in countries like Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda where laws criminalising disinformation and false news, such as  those on computer misuse, are often deployed to silence government critics.

Governments have also relied on different laws to order internet disruptions, which create information blackouts, deny citizens their right to access information, associate and express themselves. Mostly ordered during elections and public protests, the network disruptions also undermine electoral credibility and hinder the ability of citizens to record and disseminate incidents of rights violations by security agencies and other actors.

Many observers around the continent, as well as the United Nations, have repeatedly urged states to refrain from ordering shutdowns, which they say are often not necessary or proportionate to address the threats that prompt governments to order them. However, such network disruptions continue unabated in parts of Africa, with governments and communications regulators citing various laws to justify them. According to the KeepItOn coalition, at least four of the region’s nine shutdowns during 2022 took place alongside reported human rights abuses, both in the context of violent crackdowns on protests and active conflict.

There are other ways still in which the law is undermining the protection of freedom of expression and access to information and data privacy. Many African countries have enacted access to information laws to facilitate public access to information in possession of the state. They include Kenya (enacted in 2016), Rwanda (2013), South Sudan (2013), Tanzania (2016), Uganda (2005), Malawi (2017), Mozambique (2014), and Zimbabwe (2020). On the other hand, countries like the DRC, Burundi, and Zambia do not have specific laws on access to information.

However, many of the existing laws have wide exemptions and limitations to the kinds of information that citizens can access. These limitations are primarily based on national security, official secrecy laws, individual privacy and confidentiality justifications. Proactive disclosure of information is rare in most countries, and information of vital importance to citizens is in short supply online. This undermines accountability and transparency of governments, which are key ingredients for citizen participation in democracy. 

At another level, proliferation of technology has led to a need to protect individual privacy. Previously, countries collected personal data in absence of enabling legislation, for such purposes as immigration, issuance of driving permits and SIM card registration. This has, in turn, necessitated the adoption of laws to protect privacy: Uganda (2019), Kenya (2019), Rwanda (2021), Tanzania (2022), South Africa (2013), Zambia (2021) and Zimbabwe (2021). Still, countries like South Sudan, DRC, Malawi, and Mozambique are yet to enact specific laws. 

Despite the adoption of laws, they generally fall short of the ideal practices. Many countries do not have independent data protection authorities and there is inadequate oversight and enforcement of personal data protection standards and mechanisms. Moreover, only 13 of Africa’s 55 countries have ratified the African Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data protection. These are Algeria, Cape Verde, Congo Brazzaville, Ghana, Guinea, Mozambique, Mauritius, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda Senegal, Togo and Zambia. Reluctance to endorse this lead guiding instrument on data protection, privacy and cyber security is telling of countries’ commitment to respecting privacy.

Meanwhile, numerous data protection laws facilitate governments’ access to personal data without adequate safeguards, thereby enabling undue surveillance and interception of communications and unlawful use of private information. They fail to adequately regulate the mass collection of individuals’ personal data, including biometrics, for issuance of national identity cards, immigration documents, voters’ cards and driving permits. Furthermore, the laws often restrict the transfer of personal data outside national borders but do not put sufficient checks on governments’ access to this data.

Indeed, the place of the legal and regulatory framework in promoting and protecting fundamental freedoms was in focus at a regional convening on March 13-14, 2023, by the International Senior Lawyers Project (ISLP) in partnership with the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) and Southern African Institute for Policy and Research (SAIPAR) in Harare, Zimbabwe. 

The workshop identified advocacy, capacity building, analysis of laws and proposed legislation, engagements with parliaments on law reform, and litigation at national and regional courts, as key to promoting the digital civic space. Yet, as CIPESA noted at the meeting, political interference, long periods taken to determine cases, and non-compliance of states with decisions of regional courts have hampered the effectiveness of litigation.

The convening made recommendations to governments, civil society, and the private sector:

  1. Governments
  • Sign and ratify key international human rights instruments on data protection and privacy especially the African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection.
  • Ensure a favourable environment for the exercise and enjoyment of digital rights and freedoms by among others enacting progressive laws and repealing draconian legislation.
  • Promote accountability and transparency by proactively disclosing information in a timely manner and expeditiously responding to information requests from citizens.
  1. Civil Society, the Private Sector and Tech Communities
  • Jointly push for the amendment of regressive laws that undermine digital rights, and contribute to law-making processes by analysing bills and making proposals for reform, repeal or amendment. 
  • Advocate for compliance with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to ensure that violations of human rights are minimised in the course of doing business.
  • Engage in strategic and collaborative litigation to challenge all measures by governments which curtail digital rights and undermine digital democracy. 
  • Build capacity of stakeholders including the media and the general public to protect and promote digital rights and to demand accountability and transparency from governments and their agencies.
  • Use human rights monitoring mechanisms such as the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) to hold their states to account.
  • Advocate for states to ratify key human rights instruments such as the AU Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection.
12Apr

Compelled Service Provider Assistance for State Surveillance in Africa: Challenges and Policy Options

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

In many Sub-Saharan countries, state surveillance, which generally refers to state measures to monitor and supervise activities of the population, has become more pervasive and reliant on various digital technologies. The increasing communication surveillance, which entails the monitoring, interception, collection and retention of information through communication networks, undermines digital technology users’ rights, including to privacy, and often places intermediaries in a position where they fail to comply with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs).

The right to privacy online is critical due to its intricate connection with, and its being a foundation for the protection and realisation of other rights, including the rights to freedoms of expression, information, assembly, and association. Anonymity while using digital technologies helps mitigate risks of surveillance and interception of private communication as well as retaliation by the state or other parties. The fear of retaliation often forces individuals to withdraw from active participation in political and community affairs.

Also concerning are the strenuous and sometimes unclear demands by states on intermediaries, including to facilitate interception of communication, hand over communication data of their subscribers to state security agencies, and to take down content or shut down the internet. Others have adopted repressive legislation to control the spread of information on social media and to wantonly regulate internet intermediaries by placing undue liability on them for the content posted on their platforms.

This policy brief examines how mandatory obligations on telecommunication intermediaries to facilitate state surveillance undermines their ability to comply with international standards including the UNGPs, and hamper users’ rights. It draws on experiences from around Sub-Saharan Africa to illustrate how service providers are compelled through retrogressive policies and practices, to comply with state surveillance instructions. 

This brief provides recommendations for governments, social media platforms, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and civil society aimed at entrenching progressive principles in the implementation of lawful interception, empowering civil society actors to engage with technology companies to improve their human rights policies and practices, and informing efforts by businesses in awareness raising and advocacy for progressive technology governance.

Why Compelled Service Provider Assistance is Problematic

Compelling service provider assistance is a key contributor to undermining users’ privacy in Africa. The assistance rendered by intermediaries is used to facilitate internet disruptions, access to users’ data with ease, content removals, decryption of users’ encrypted data, and state surveillance.

According to the brief, laws on surveillance and the interception of communications across the continent, including in Benin, Cameroon, Chad, Ivory Coast, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe mirror each other and require communication service providers to put in place mechanisms, including the installation of software, to facilitate access and interception of communications by state agencies.

Those laws do not provide for sufficient judicial oversight or accountability mechanisms yet they place undue requirements on intermediaries, such as compelling them to facilitate communication interception by state authorities, including in instances where there are no court-issued warrants authorising surveillance. 

The brief makes several recommendations, among them:

Governments 

Develop, review, update and strengthen national laws, policies and practices on state surveillance in order to bring them into compliance with well-established international human rights standards including as elaborated in Principle 41 of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa, and the International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance (Necessary and Proportionate Principles).

Revise national laws governing state surveillance to ensure that they provide for clear and robust oversight over surveillance including by judicial and legislative bodies. 

Implement the actionable steps and meet their obligations with respect to the protection of the right to privacy under the protect, respect and remedy framework in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, including moving towards mandatory human rights due diligence, which could be instrumental in regulation of technologies and the tech sector. 

Technology Companies
Conduct human rights due diligence to identify, prevent or mitigate risks of compelled service provider assistance and surveillance on the lifecycle of the products and services and their business operations. 

Develop rights-respecting policies, responsible business practices and culture in line with international human rights standards such as the UNGPs and the Necessary and Proportionate principles, with a key aspect of such policies focusing on how the companies assess government requests for users’ data and for surveillance support.

Speak out on national laws, policies and directives that place undue obligations and liability on intermediaries and hinder them from fulfilling the UNGPs.

Civil society 

Adopt a multi-stakeholder approach to digital rights advocacy as a critical avenue to promote shared understanding of the human rights risks and impacts of technology and communication surveillance in Africa. 

Collaborate with other stakeholders in various African countries to advocate against continued unchecked communication surveillance and to promote the adoption of international human rights standards on privacy and data protection. 

Conduct strategic public interest litigation to challenge laws, policies, practices and directives that threaten the right to privacy, such as those on compelled service provider assistance, and obtain remedies for victims of illegal state surveillance.

Academia

Conduct research to promote greater understanding of the human rights risks of communication surveillance and the technology business models on the continent. 

Review the surveillance, privacy and data protection laws, standards and guidelines and propose domestically-driven policy solutions on how to entrench and domesticate international human rights standards and principles on the right to privacy.

12Apr

CIPESA at the Digital Rights and Inclusion Forum (DRIF23)

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

The Digital Rights and Inclusion Forum (DRIF) is an annual convening hosted by Nigeria based Paradigm Initiative. Themed “Building a sustainable Internet for all”, this year, the event is being hosted in Nairobi, Kenya on 12-14 April. DRIF is a platform where conversations on digital policy in Africa are shaped, policy directions debated and partnerships forged for action. 

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) will host and participate in a range of discussions at DRIF alongside various regional and international partners.

Below are the sessions and workshops CIPESA will participate in.

Examining Disinformation Trends and Effects in Africa 

Host: CIPESA

12 April 2023 | 12:15pm – 1:00pm (Nairobi) | Attend

 Disinformation is growing to near-pandemic levels in various African countries yet the spectrum of its adverse effects on fundamental rights, civic participation and public safety is not fully known. What is clear is that disinformation undermines the resilience and safety of human rights defenders (HRDs) and journalists, while hampering free expression and public participation. Led by CIPESA, this session will bring together disinformation researchers, fact-checkers and HRDs to discuss trends in disinformation instigators, tactics, pathways, and the effects that disinformation has on their work. It will explore disinformation effects on electoral integrity, the role of political actors as instigators and agents of disinformation, the effects of government counter-measures on civic rights and freedoms online. It will also unpack the role that different actors, including the private sector, ought to play in order to definitively tackle the vice.

Re-designing for a sustainable future through effective digital rights advocacy at the UPR

Host: Small Media Foundation

12 April 2023 | 2:15pm – 3:15pm (Nairobi) | Attend

This session has two major goals — to learn from the past successes and challenges of digital rights advocacy at the UPR and think through ways of building stronger partnerships with stakeholders on the ground. To start with, there will be a presentation on designing campaign and advocacy materials for digital rights at the UPR. After this, the session will take a look back at the last three UPR cycles and digital rights development, identify the successes and challenges and see how these fit into a future for a more vibrant advocacy at the UPR. It will also map the various strategies necessary to pool stakeholders in countries worked on by the UPROAR project together with respect to advocacy for digital rights at the UPR.

The primary goal of such a pool is to have at least one go-to stakeholder that can be approached in each country where UPROAR works for on-the-spot information with respect to digital rights advocacy at the UPR. The post-event value of this session is to have both an evaluation of digital rights advocacy at the UPR so far and strengthen monitoring through partnerships on the ground.

#KeepItOn Election Watch: supporting the fight against internet shutdown in 2023

Host: Access Now

12 April 2023 | 3:30pm – 4:30pm (Nairobi) | Attend

Access Now and the #KeepItOn coalition will be monitoring at least 15 elections in 2023 to ensure that authorities in these countries do not interfere with internet and digital communications throughout the electoral process. This session seeks to provide insights about the #KeepItOn Election Watch campaign to the DRIF participants and explore opportunities of working together with other partners. The session will also be an opportunity for participants to reflect on the challenges, lessons learnt and opportunities faced in the fight against shutdowns. At the end of the session, participants will learn about the various ways in which they can support the #KeepItOn community.

At What Risk to Rights and Internet Freedom? Examining Government Responses to Disinformation

Hosts: Article 19 West Africa, CIPESA, Centre for Human Rights University Pretoria, PROTEGE QV, Global Partners Digital

13 April 2023 | 11:30am – 12:30pm (Nairobi) | Attend

This session will turn attention to actions governments have taken in recent years to pass laws and policies that impact human rights online – particularly freedom of expression – in the name of fighting disinformation. The session will discuss the role of human rights defenders and civil society in countering these actions and calling for change. Specifically, it will look to country case studies utilising the research tool lextoa.org – such as from Uganda and Senegal and also Kenya as the DRIF 2023 host country – where such laws exist and the ways in which civil society has provided analysis, engagement (of media, policymakers, companies) and recommendations to governments on promoting policies that respect human rights. Session participants will be encouraged to ask questions of the panellists and bring their own experiences from differing national contexts across Sub-Saharan Africa to the debate. They will also be invited to contribute to ongoing research and awareness raising of this issue on lexota.org and contribute resources and new material to the site.

Internet Access and Marginalisation in Africa: Experiences Within Africa

Host: Global Voices

14 April 2023 | 9:00am – 10:00am (Nairobi) | Attend

Issues of connectivity have been a major challenge in Africa and the world as a whole. Over the last few years, Africa has experienced exponential growth in internet access spurred by mobile internet, which stood at 28% penetration in 2020. However, internet access and affordability are still a major challenge for the majority of Africans, especially the marginalised rural communities, women, and persons with disabilities. According to the State of Mobile Internet Connectivity 2021, Sub-Saharan Africa has the largest coverage gap (those living in areas without mobile broadband coverage) at 19%, which is more than three times the global average. A new report detailing the cost of mobile data in different markets across the world bears the evidence of why internet use in most of Africa remains low despite the growing broadband internet coverage. This session provides a platform to interrogate barriers to internet access and their exclusionary effect as well as to provide solutions and recommendations to the issues of internet connectivity across Africa

Closed 2-Day Workshop – The Future of Digital Rights in Africa: The Role of Policymakers and Advocacy at the UPR

Hosts: UPROAR & CIPESA

The objective of this workshop is to identify the various and applicable human rights frameworks under international, regional and national frameworks. The session will highlight some of the major provisions of these frameworks and how the UPR can be used to shape the national frameworks. We will also learn how to identify digital rights issues and apply practical solutions to resolving them. By the end of this session, participants will understand the supporting human rights instruments for UPR and how local laws can be made to conform with international standards.

29Mar

Court Admits Expert Views from CIPESA, Access Now and Article 19 on Uganda’s Digital ID 

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

On March 24, 2023, the High Court of Uganda at Kampala ruled to allow experts from Access Now, ARTICLE 19, and the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) to offer their opinions on the human rights red flags around the country’s digital identification (ID) system. 

The ruling followed an application by the three organisations for admission as “Friends of Court” in a case which challenges the use of the National Identification Register as the sole data source and primary means of identification prior to accessing various social services. Uganda’s national digital ID, also known as Ndaga Muntu, is a mandatory scheme for accessing various socio-economic services.

The court admitted the amicus brief submission by the trio despite objections from the Attorney General and the National Identification Registration Authority (NIRA) on grounds that the application was facilitated by bias and partiality of the applicants. The respondents further argued that the applications introduced new, inadmissible evidence – an assertion the court did not agree with. The court, in fact, noted the significance of the arguments raised  by Access Now, ARTICLE 19 and CIPESA, particularly on data protection, digital inclusion, surveillance, and the sufficiency of protection measures and their impact on the right to privacy.

The admission means that the court will consider the opinions of the three organisations in determining the case challenging Uganda’s digital ID system. In his ruling, Justice  Boniface Wamala noted that the matters the three organisations raised did not constitute evidence. Rather, they “constitute legal concepts that are new, unfamiliar, unusual or unique. Such aspects constitute the quality of novelty.”

The organisations made the application as neutral parties and experts to assist the court to be better abreast with novel areas that potentially contribute to the development of the law. 

The joint brief seeks to help court fully grasp the potential impact of the national digital ID program on online and offline rights including the right to privacy, the right to freedom of expression, as well as intersecting economic, social, and cultural rights by providing expert evidence at national, sub regional, regional, and international levels. It also explains how the digital identity system might contribute to excluding citizens from basic access to services, thereby leaving them in a vulnerable state.  

The case challenging the ID system was filed by the Initiative for Social and Economic Rights,  Unwanted Witness, and Health Equity and Policy Initiative, against the Ugandan Attorney General and the NIRA. The NIRA is the body charged with creating and managing the National Identification Register by registering births, deaths, citizens and non-citizens. 

In its affidavit in support of the amicus application, CIPESA argued that as an expert in  advancing internet freedom and governance, civic participation, and data governance, it saw the need to intervene as a friend of court, in public interest and the interest of justice, to promote and protect human rights.

According to CIPESA’s Legal Officer, Edrine Wanyama, the ruling to hear the opinions of the expert organisations could help in shaping new and emerging areas of the law in Uganda on the need to respect privacy and other rights in the deployment of digital technologies in public digitalisation programmes, including initiatives like the Digital ID.

“This is a demonstration of the commitment of the courts to remain open to new and emerging knowledge and jurisprudence and to receive expert opinions on how to protect citizens from potential harms associated with the use of technology,” said Wanyama. 

CIPESA anticipates that the court will draw considerable knowledge from the amicus submissions and reach a decision that ensures that the roll-out of the digital ID system does not serve as a tool for exclusion but as an inclusion tool for all persons in accessing social and economic services.

Access Now, ARTICLE 19, and CIPESA aim to continue offering the court expert views that could help to ensure that the digital ID system is implemented in a manner that respects minimum human rights standards and promotes and protects rights and freedoms.

1 … 22 23 24 25 26 … 164