Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Category Archives: Blog

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Blog  /  Blog
25Nov

Regulating Freedom of Expression Amidst the Covid-19 Response in South Africa

Author CIPESA Writer Posted on

By Tusi Fokane |

The global infodemic accelerated in part by the Covid-19 pandemic has raised important debates on how best to respond to the proliferation of false and misleading information online. The Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression addressed the critical issue of misinformation, noting that some actions undertaken by various governments to contain the spread of the coronavirus may fail to meet the test of legality, necessity and proportionality. The report cautioned against the introduction of vague and overly-broad laws to combat misinformation, proposing instead that governments provide reliable information to citizens.

Six months after a National State of Disaster was declared in South Africa, the government on September 16, 2020 eased the lockdown, removing “as many of the remaining restrictions on economic and social activity as it is reasonably safe to do.” One notable restriction still in place  is the criminalisation of the publication of “any statement through any medium including social media, with the intent to deceive,” pursuant to Regulation 11(5), under the Disaster Management Act, which was issued in March 2020. The offense is punishable with an unspecified fine, imprisonment of up to six months, or both.

The regulations were followed by directives from the Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies compelling communications service providers to “remove Covid-19 related fake news from their platforms immediately after it is identified as such”. Within days of its passing, several individuals were arrested for spreading false information about Covid-19. In one case relating to a Covid-19 interview, the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa fined two broadcasters South African Rand 10,000 (USD 660).

Whilst various activists initially raised their voices in support of   governments’ efforts to halt the spread of the disease, they also cautioned against overly restrictive conditions that limit human rights including  freedom of expression, access to information and public accountability.

Civil Society Reactions to the Regulations on “Fake News”

The debate about the impact of South Africa’s Covid-19 regulations on  free speech came into focus when a leading academic and member of the Covid-19 Ministerial Advisory Committee, Professor Glenda Gray made public comments about the effectiveness of the lockdown restrictions. The Minister of Health declared the academic’s views false and misleading. This prompted leading academics to conclude that “the government has repeatedly stressed that its primary goal in managing the pandemic is to save lives. But it needn’t kill speech to save lives.”

In April 2020, the Right2Know Campaign (R2K) wrote to the National Coronavirus Command Council regarding the “fake news” provisions of lockdown regulations. Whilst noting the potentially deleterious effects of false information, R2K made  proposals to amend the regulations to ensure the protection of the right to freedom of expression. Among the amendments proposed by R2K was the definition of “fake news”  to be clarified as the “dissemination of false information with the intention to deceive…”

Further, R2K noted that the “criminalisation of speech inevitably has a chilling effect on the right to freedom of expression.” It proposed administrative penalties, rather than criminal sanctions, for disseminating false information. Another key proposal was that the government should make provision for relevant defences that an offender could rely on when faced with a charge of spreading false information.

Other critics, such as the Free Market Foundation (FMF), rejected the fake news regulations outright, calling on the government to rely on existing common law and constitutional provisions rather than attempting to regulate expression through the introduction of additional regulations. The FMF argued that, “there is simply too much information circulating in society for any centralised body to be entrusted with deciding its accuracy. Instead, we must rely on the decentralised gatekeeping network known as ‘the market’ to assist us in judging what is true and what is false.”

Meanwhile, Media Monitoring Africa (MMA) stated in a statement in March that the regulations were narrowly defined, and proposed a high standard on the state to prove “intention to deceive.” The group  said the real challenge would be the government’s ability to implement and enforce the fake news regulations.

None of these proposals were taken into account and the current regulations remain in force under the extension of the state of national disaster, imposing undue restrictions on the right to freedom of expression.

Enforcement of the “Fake News” Regulations

As part of measures to enforce the regulations, the government established a multi-stakeholder monitoring and evaluation platform and Digital Complaints Committee to monitor and respond to misinformation and fake news related to Covid-19.  Then Acting Communications and Digital Technologies Minister, Jackson Mthembu, stated that the platform aims to assess misinformation complaints, take down fake news items, and submit cases to the police for investigation and prosecution.

According to MMA Director, William Bird, the task of combating fake news should not be left to government and platform providers. Since 2019, MMA has maintained Real411, an independent digital platform for reporting suspected misinformations. Thandi Smith, MMA’s Head of Programmes, explains that complaints are assessed by a team of three voluntary reviewers with legal, technology, and media expertise. The reviewers then make a recommendation to a five-member secretariat based on a set of assessment criteria.

Upon completion of an investigation, the secretariat recommends a range of actions which may include issuing a take-down notice, fact-checking verification, and publishing a counter-narrative infographic. Bird said the secretariat reports hate speech cases to the South African Human Rights Commission for further action. Extreme cases of misinformation would be reported to the South African police, but to-date no complaints warranting police investigation have been received. Complaints about the media and editorial content are referred to the relevant regulatory authority. Smith noted that there is an appeal process headed up by a retired Constitutional Court judge.

 Assessing the Effectiveness of Criminalising Misinformation

It may be difficult to assess the effectiveness of fake news regulations on Covid-19 given the rapid spread of information in the digital environment. This raises philosophical and policy issues on whether free expression online should even be regulated at all, and by whom.

Indeed, Ghalib Galant, Deputy National Coordinator & Head of Advocacy for the R2K Campaign, maintains that the challenge with South Africa’s Covid-19 misinformation regulatory framework is that government’s response was to criminalise behaviour rather than focusing on educating and supporting South Africans to understand the impact of the pandemic. As he puts it, “Government policed people, rather than healing a health pandemic.”

Galant suggested that administrative penalties may be a better deterrent than criminal sanctions. This would ensure the protection of the right to freedom of expression whilst the country debates whether or not new rules are needed for regulating false information, or a “re-imagining of section 16 of the Constitution.” Galant suggests that perhaps this could be within the purview of a statutory institution such as the Information Regulator.

Section 16(1) of South Africa’s Constitution states that “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom of the press and other media; freedom to receive or impart information or ideas; freedom of artistic creativity; and academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.” Section 16(2) restricts speech related “to propaganda for war; incitement of imminent violence; or advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm.”

The head of legal, policy and research at the FMF, Martin van Staden, said fake news regulations have not been effective as they are difficult to enforce. From his perspective, any prohibition on freedom of expression beyond Section 16(2) Constitutional limitations would amount to censorship. He stated: “The Constitution is unequivocal about the scope of the right to freedom of expression, and it does not include a provision that only ‘factual’ expression is allowed. This means that misinformation is constitutionally protected expression in South Africa, and must be left alone.”

He recommends that the government should instead provide accurate and reliable information, and develop a strong counter-narrative strategy, which would enable South African citizens to reach their own conclusions on the veracity of any information they receive.

Van Staden cautioned against the state’s “paternalism” and future attempts to introduce legislation aimed at ensuring the truthfulness of information that is disseminated. “The right to freedom of expression is meant to protect the uncomfortable, the unpopular, and the offensive,” he said.

Threats to Freedom of Expression Beyond Covid-19 Regulations

There is uncertainty on whether the National State of Disaster will be extended again beyond December 15, 2020, given concerns of a second wave of Covid-19 infections in the country. Freedom of expression experts have warned that whilst fake news may be decriminalised by a declaration of the end of the State of Disaster,  the government may attempt to use impending legislation to further regulate free speech online.

For example, in July 2020, the Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies released a call for comments on the gazetted draft Film and Publications amendment regulations, (commonly known as the internet censorship bill), which introduces a requirement for pre-classification of online content with the Film and Publications Board.

Another key piece of legislation in the pipeline is the Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill, which lapsed and is currently on hold, pending judgment on the Qwelane hate speech Constitutional Court challenge which was heard on  September 22, 2020.

Qwelane contends that the prohibited grounds listed in section 10(1) of the Promotion of Equality and Protection of Unfair Discrimination Act (Equality Act) are overly broad, go far beyond the limitations set out in section 16(2) of the Constitution, and unjustifiably limit the right to freedom of expression.

The outcome of the Qwelane case will be important in clarifying the limitations on free speech for South Africans given ongoing debates on the regulation of freedom of expression both online and offline. This is particularly important in setting clear parameters for free speech and false and misleading information in South Africa. This will assist in ensuring that unprotected speech is very narrowly defined and does not unjustifiably limit the Constitutional right to freedom of expression.

Tusi Fokane is a 2020 CIPESA Fellow focussing on the the availability and use of digital technologies to combat the spread of Covid-19 in South Africa. She is also  studying the country’s readiness for electronic voting to comply with social distancing and other movement restrictions during the upcoming local government elections.

18Nov

Civil Society Groups Denounce the European Union’s Involvement in Surveillance in Africa

Author ashnah Posted on

Open Letter |

The increasing involvement of foreign entities in undermining democracy and respect for human rights in the digital sphere in Africa is widely documented. Whereas these schemes have mostly been attributed to spyware vendors and data analytics firms, recent disclosures have implicated the European Union (EU).

Investigations by Privacy International have revealed the use of EU aid and cooperation programmes to train and equip security forces in Africa with surveillance techniques. The disclosures reveal that the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) has trained police and security agencies in Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia in phone and internet surveillance, including social media monitoring, telecommunications metadata analysis, device investigations and data extraction. According to Privacy International, whereas cybersecurity, terrorism and violent extremism are threats in the countries that CEPOL is supporting, “the absence of effective privacy and security safeguards and in contexts where security agencies arbitrarily target activists, journalists and others, surveillance techniques and tools pose a serious threat to people’s rights and their work.”

In Algeria, Egypt, Niger, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia, EU bodies are reportedly training and equipping border and migration authorities with surveillance tools, including wiretapping systems and other phone surveillance tools, in a bid to “outsource” the EU’s border controls. Further, support for the development of biometric identity systems in Cote d’Ivoire, Mali and Senegal with EU aid funds is raising serious privacy concerns.

In response to the revelations, Privacy International, the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), together with 12 civil society organisations from Europe and Africa have submitted a letter to the European Commission calling for urgent reforms to EU aid and cooperation programmes to ensure they promote privacy protections in non-member countries and do not facilitate the use of surveillance which violates fundamental rights.

In the letter, the civil society organisations call on the European Commission to enact strict due diligence and risk assessment procedures, and to agree to transparency, parliamentary scrutiny and public oversight measures aimed at protecting human rights in non-member countries.

A copy of the letter is available here.

13Nov

CIPESA to Participate In IGF 2020 Session on Building Inclusive Digital Economies in Emerging Markets

Author CIPESA Writer Posted on

IGF 2020 |

Over the past few decades, the rapid adoption of digital technologies has transformed how people engage with one another socially, politically, and economically. This transition is particularly notable in times of crisis that restricts personal movement, such as the Covid-19 pandemic, when internet connectivity and the digital ecosystem around it becomes indispensable for access to information, communication, and ability to work remotely and conduct e-commerce.

At this year’s Internet Governance Forum (IGF), the Center for International Public Enterprise (CIPE) will host a session exploring the building of inclusive digital economies in emerging markets which will explore how diverse actors are reimagining and rebuilding their local communities and how the global community can help ensure inclusive, digitally-enabled economic growth in the post-covid-19 era. The session will include panelists from the first cohort of the Open Internet for Democracy Leaders program, the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), the Center for Indonesian Policy Studies in Jakarta, Indonesia, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Join the session on Building Inclusive Digital Economies in Emerging Markets on Monday, 16 November 2020 at 0:10 to 11:10 (UTC)

The pandemic underscored the gaps in the digital divide, both globally and within countries, particularly felt by local businesses in emerging markets. Entrepreneurs traditionally engaged in the informal economy, especially women and small businesses throughout the Global South, continue to face numerous barriers in utilizing online marketplaces to maintain and expand their operations. Barriers such as accessibility and affordability of the internet, insufficient resources and tools to upskill businesses, and the inadequate national-level digital policies and frameworks that facilitate competitiveness and access to global markets continue to undermine the shared United Nations goal to leave no one behind by 2030.

Business resiliency and new opportunities to engage in digital commerce are paramount to building an inclusive economy. To realize an equitable post-Covid-19 recovery, the global community must build consensus around key priorities impacting the development of more inclusive digital economies.

This requires coordinated multi-stakeholder efforts that provide opportunities to share locally-sourced priorities and solutions, establish new partnerships with common goals, and ensure diverse participation in policy development and implementation. Such efforts should include local business communities, women, and marginalized groups that are often excluded in the decision-making processes that affect their lives and livelihoods.

This participatory workshop will explore how diverse actors are reimagining and rebuilding their local communities and how the global community can help ensure inclusive, digitally-enabled economic growth in the post-Covid-19 era, with an emphasis on expanding digital inclusion across emerging markets. While the session speakers will provide key insights on resiliency and how to build inclusive frameworks, the core of the discussion will be dedicated to highlighting perspectives from the broader IGF community through online participation

See more about the session here.

The-Africa-Digital-Rights-Fund
30Oct

Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF) Awards USD 138,000 to Initiatives Addressing the Covid-19 Digital Rights Fallout

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Ashnah Kalemera |

In its third round, the Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF) has awarded USD 138,000 to 11 initiatives responding to the digital rights fallout from the fight against the coronavirus disease (Covid-19). The grantees’ interventions span 22 African countries – the largest geographic footprint of the Fund yet – and address a range of issues including state surveillance, freedom of expression, data rights, repressive legislation, access to information, digital security and resilience.

The Unseen Eyes, Unheard Stories: Surveillance and Data Protection during COVID-19 project by a consortium consisting of ARTICLE 19 Eastern Africa, Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) and Pollicy,   has been awarded a grant to review Covid-19 surveillance practices in Kenya and Uganda and adherence to data protection frameworks by government and private entities in the respective countries. The resulting report will inform a webinar, social media engagements and op-eds to promote awareness and understanding of privacy and data protection online. The consortium will also develop and disseminate two documentaries capturing personal experiences of individuals who were subjected to Covid-19 contact-tracing in the two countries.

Unlike Kenya and Uganda , Namibia does not have a data protection and privacy law. In a study to inform consultations on a data protection and privacy bill, the Internet Society (ISOC) Namibia Chapter has been awarded a grant to research the country’s data protection and privacy stance over the past five years, with a focus on Covid-19 regulations.

Still on data rights, the Financial Inclusion Forum will be supported to convene Ghana’s first Data Protection and Privacy Policy Conference as a platform for financial service providers, industry regulators, and government to discuss issues of data protection and privacy in the country’s digital financial services sector. The conference will also serve as an opportunity to synthesise and validate a draft policy model on regulating the collection and sharing of consumer data in the industry.

In a test of the robustness of access to information legislation in Botswana, Nigeria, and Uganda, a grant to EndCode will enable them to explore protocols  around access to critical information collected by governments in Covid-19 contact tracing databases. EndCode will use the research findings to develop an instructional video and poster series to promote awareness on the link between access to information and the right to health. This project aims to answer important questions relevant to the present pandemic context while also laying the foundation for future work and engagement with duty bearers on the right of access to information in public health contexts.

As part of its ADRF round two project on identity-driven hate speech, misinformation and harassment in African digital spaces during politically charged periods, Global Voices – Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa also explored native language content as advocacy and information sharing tools to combat the spread of Covid-19. Building on that and earlier work on Writing Toward Freedom: Politics and digital rights in Africa, Global Voices will use the new ADRF grant to investigate how governments attempt to control narratives around Covid-19 by favouring narratives that benefit their position or reputation amidst the pandemic and exploiting the pandemic to further clamp down on digital rights.

In this regard, Global Voices will train journalists from nine countries – Algeria, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda and Zimbabwe to investigate and report on the intersection of public health and digital rights – specifically how competing Covid-19 narratives flourished online and the ways in which African governments seized upon the pandemic to crack down on citizens’ rights online. The stories produced by the  journalists will be published in Arabic, English, French, Portuguese, Swahili and Yoruba and promoted on social media to raise awareness of digital rights and actual and potential manipulation by governments of narratives around the pandemic.

Similarly, a grant to Tunis-based Streaming HD SARL and ISS Centre will enable them explore the impact of Covid-19 emergency responses on the digital rights landscape in the Maghreb region. In a series of themed podcasts and articles, the project will document voices of local activists and expert testimonies on privacy and contact-tracing apps, mis/disinformation online, freedom of speech restrictions, hate speech and violence against women, information transparency and accessibility, cybercrime and inclusion in Mauritania, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya.

Why fund Covid-19 Digital Rights Initiatives?
The 2020 State of Internet Freedom in Africa report which investigated the measures implemented by governments in Africa in fighting the Covid-19 pandemic shows that the highhandedness with which the governments and their agencies enforced the different Covid-19 preventive measures, including the suspension of rights through emergency declarations and the gagging of critical voices calling for transparency and accountability in handling the pandemic has greatly affected digital rights on the continent. According to the report, prior to and during the pandemic period, several countries enacted retrogressive laws and implemented oppressive measures that served to strengthen the state’s repressive hand at the expense of citizens’ rights.

Covid-19 response measures have re-shaped the operations of civil society organisations across the continent. In some instances, organisations have rushed to adopt various technology tools in order to continue operations while working from home, leading to new security vulnerabilities. The Digital Security Alliance hosted by Defender Protection Initiative (DPI) will assess the digital security risk exposure of 50 Ugandan civil society organisations in their pursuit to adopt technology tools for business continuity. The multi-media assessment report aims to create a shared understanding of security risks associated with technology uptake and enhance the identification of gaps for secure technology use in remote working.

In Somalia, ADRF has previously supported Digital Shelter’s work to strengthen the digital resilience of women human rights defenders. These efforts will continue with support to the Women in Media Initiative Somalia (WIMISOM) to build the digital security skills and knowledge of 150 women journalists (print, broadcast and online) and women-led media organisations as a means of combating growing online threats against the female journalists and their sources.

Whereas countries in Francophone West Africa have recorded increasing digitalisation – further boosting human rights and participatory democracy –   a number of governments in the region have passed a series of laws targeting freedom of expression online. Indeed, the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) has documented violations against journalists, media outlets, dissidents, bloggers, and human rights activists in West Africa for their online activities. This, according to MFWA, has led to “a rollback of the improvements in conditions for the safety of journalists, human rights defenders and citizens in the sub-region.”

With an ADRF grant, the Accra-based MFWA will conduct an analysis of recent internet and cyber-related laws in Benin, Burkina Faso, Niger, Mali, Mauritania, and Togo and highlight violations perpetrated against journalists, bloggers, activists, and human rights defenders based on these laws. The resultant policy paper and infographics will form the basis of evidenced-based advocacy for improving digital rights and freedom of expression in Francophone Africa.

Meanwhile, in November 2020 Malawi will undergo its third cycle of the Universal Periodic Review at the United Nations Human Rights Council, during which its mixed democratic credentials and digital rights record will likely feature prominently. Prevailing challenges include lack of an access to information law and limited access to the internet, which has left Malawians vulnerable to misinformation and disinformation. A recent joint civil society campaign which yielded positive policy actions – telecom companies reducing data rates – highlights the potential of coordinated civil society advocacy in influencing the country’s digital rights landscape. Accordingly, with an ADRF grant, the Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation (CHRR) will work to consolidate local civil society actions and voices regarding digital rights and coordinate joint strategies against regressive policy and legislative provisions.

Finally, the African Legal Think Tank on Women’s Rights has been awarded a grant to conduct an assessment on the role of the internet in fuelling the growth of human trafficking, including online recruitment and advertisement. With a focus on the Democratic Republic of Congo, The Gambia, and Mauritania, the assessment will feed into the development of a curriculum and a digital campaign targeted at survivors and networks working to combat human trafficking, with the aim of equipping them with tools to influence prevention and protection strategies.

The ADRF third round grantees brings to 33 the number of initiatives supported with a total sum of USD 355,000 since the Fund’s launch in April 2019.

Round One Round Two Round Three
Total Award Amount USD 65,000 USD 152,000 USD 138,000
Initiatives Supported 1.     Access for All
2.  African Human Rights Network (AHRN) Foundation
3. Burundi Youths Training Centre
4.  Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria
5.   Freedom of Expression Hub (FoE Hub)
6. Global Voices – Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa
7.  Internet Society (ISOC) Namibia Chapter
8.     Jonction
9. Kuza STEAM Generation (KsGEN) and Centre for Youth Empowerment and Leadership (CYEL)
10. YMCA Computer Training Centre and Digital Studio		 1.   Action et Humanisme
2.    ADISI Cameroun
3.     African Feminism
4. CUTS- Centre for International Trade, Economics and Environment
5.     Digital Shelter
6.    Forum de Organizacoes de Pessoas com Deficiencia (Mozambique Disabled Persons Orgazations Forum)
7. Global Voices – Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa
8.     iWatch Africa
9.     Jamii Forums
10.  JP MEDIA and Sobanukirwa
11.  Mzalendo Trust
12.  Rudi International
13. Somaliland Journalists Association (SOLJA)
14. Zimbabwe Centre for Media and Information Literacy (ZCMIL) in collaboration with the National University of Science and Technology (NUST)		 1.    African Legal Think Tank on Women’s Rights
2.  Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation (CHRR)
3.  Consortium consisting of Pollicy, Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet), and ARTICLE 19 Eastern Africa
4. Defenders Protection Initiative (DPI)
5.     EndCode Proprietary
6.     Financial Inclusion Forum
7. Global Voices – Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa
8. Internet Society (ISOC) Namibia Chapter
9.  Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA)
10.  Streaming HD SARL and ISS Center
11.  Women In Media Initiative Somalia (WIMISOM)
Countries Covered 16 – Algeria, Burundi, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gambia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Senegal, South Sudan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe 18 – Algeria, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Somalia, Somaliland, Sudan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe 22 – Algeria, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe

The ADRF is an initiative of the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) with support from the Ford Foundation, the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), the German Society for International Cooperation Agency (GIZ), and the Omidyar Network.

19Oct

Tanzania Tramples Digital Rights in Fight Against Covid-19

Author CIPESA Posted on

CIPESA Writer |

Since the first case of the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) was announced in Tanzania on March 16, 2020, the government has been in the spotlight for its handling of the pandemic. It has denied the severity of the pandemic, suspended media houses, and criminalised Covid-19-related speech through enactment and enforcement of repressive regulations. 

In turn, there have been growing concerns that these measures are not only hurting the fight against the pandemic, but the wider enjoyment of civil liberties in the country, especially in the leadup to the October 28, 2020 general election.

Tanzania has been criticised for its lackluster response to the Covid-19 pandemic, with the World Health Organization (WHO) citing its lack of transparency. Further, a team of United Nations experts noted that the government was not meeting its commitments on information sharing and transparency, after it stopped releasing statistics on Covid-19 cases at the end of April. 

At the end of March, Tanzania’s President, John Pombe Magufuli, is reported to have encouraged people to continue visiting places of worship, while comparing the virus to the Biblical Satan and saying that it “cannot survive in the body of Jesus Christ.”

President Magufuli also rejected the need to restrict movement of citizens, claiming stringent social isolation measures would severely damage the economy, and in June 2020, he declared the country virus-free, “thanks to God” and prayers by citizens.

In July 2020, the United Nation experts stated that Covid-19 had compounded the pre-existing human rights concerns in Tanzania, notably, the right to freedom of expression, including freedom to seek, receive and impart information.

Enactment of repressive regulations

In July 2020, the government repealed the 2018 Tanzania’s Electronic and Postal Communications (Online Content) Regulations and replaced them with the Tanzania Electronic and Postal Communications (Online Content Regulations 2020. The 2020 regulations aggravate the crackdown on free speech as they require the registration of bloggers, online discussion forums, radio and television webcasters. 

The new regulations define “news related content”, as “online news information gathering, compiling, editing, publication and broadcasting in a manner similar or that bears a resemblance to traditional media services provision.” In the renew regulations, the definition of an “online forum” has been expanded to cover every possible online fora and “online platforms.” These definitions are so vague that their application is potentially boundless in scope.

Further, they impose annual license fees on the online content services, grant the regulator sweeping powers to suspend media outlets and journalists, and detail a broad list of prohibited content. 

Among others, the regulations prohibit the publication of “content with information with regards to the outbreak of a deadly or contagious disease in the country or elsewhere without the approval of the respective authorities.” The penalty for breach of the regulations is a fine of not less than five million Tanzanian shillings (USD 2,140), imprisonment for not less than 12 months, or both.

Regulation 9(g) expands the obligations of online content service providers to immediately take down any prohibited content once ordered by the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority (TCRA).

Criminalisation of Covid-19 false news

Besides the enactment of repressive Covid-19-related regulations, the government has also invoked laws predating the pandemic to intimidate, arrest, and detain persons, including whistleblowers and critics, in order to censor what is perceived as Covid-19 misinformation or disinformation.

In March 2020, the Tanzania Prime Minister, Kassim Majaliwa, warned the public against spreading against misinformation around the coronavirus outbreak, stating that those found guilty would be dealt with. He directed the TCRA to monitor and apprehend persons disseminating false news, which he said was causing confusion in society. The government subsequently released a list of qualified persons to educate the public about Covid-19, and directed that all media source information only from those on the list.

These threats were quickly followed up with arrests and prosecution of individuals, and harassment of media houses, some of whom had their licences suspended. 

In April 2020, there were numerous individuals arrested and charged due to Covid-19 related content that authorities deemed unofficial. A similar argument was maid against media houses which resulted in having their licenses suspended.

Awadhi Lugoya was arrested and accused of wrongful use of social media, for opening a Facebook account called “Coronavirus Tanzania” and using it to purportedly spread “misleading information” about the pandemic. Mariamu Jumanne Sanane, a third-year student at the University of Dar es Salaam, was arrested in April 2020 after she claimed on social media that there were 230 confirmed cases of Covid-19 and four deaths in Tanzania. 

Meanwhile, Afrikana Mlay was arrested over accusations of spreading false information on social media, to the effect that the government was hiding the number of coronavirus disease cases in the country. The police claimed that the post was “intended to create panic and discourage efforts being undertaken by the government in fighting [the] spread of the virus.”

On April 28, 2020, Ibrahim Bukuku, a first-year student at the University of Dodoma, was arrested and charged for allegedly disseminating false and misleading information through a WhatsApp group about an alleged cure for Covid-19.  

Similarly, earlier in April 2020, Albert Sengo, a journalist working with Jembe Radio FM in Mwanza region, was charged in court for publishing online content on his “unregistered” online GSENGO TV

On the same day, Albert Msando, a prominent lawyer in the Arusha region, was arrested and later charged with allegedly spreading Covid-19 misinformation over his remarks about the worsening coronavirus situation in Arusha. His arrest came only hours after Arusha Regional Commissioner Mrisho Gambo had directed the police force to arrest any citizen disseminating conflicting public information on Covid-19.

Also in April, the Zanzibar Information Department suspended Talib Ussi Hamad, a journalist with the Tanzania Daima daily newspaper, for six months under the Registration of News Agents, Newspapers, and Books Act No. 5 of 1988 and its amendments No. 8 of 1997. Talib Hamad had allegedly reported about a Covid-19 patient without the patient’s consent. He filed a case in the Zanzibar High Court in July challenging the decision. The Zanzibar government lifted the suspension in August 2020. 

Likewise, Mwananchi daily newspaper had its online license suspended for six months and fined five million shillings (USD 2,200) by the TCRA after it posted a photo of President Magufuli out shopping and surrounded by a crowd of people, eliciting online discussion on Tanzania’s approach to addressing Covid-19 and the apparent breach of social distancing guidelines. According to the TCRA, the paper breached the Electronic and Postal Communications (Online Content) Regulations as its report was allegedly misleading and had caused confusion in the community. 

Three other media organisations – Star Media Tanzania Ltd, Multichoice Tanzania Ltd and Azam Digital Broadcast Ltd – were on April 2, 2020 fined USD 2,200 each and ordered to apologise for “transmission of false and misleading information” about the country’s approach to managing Covid-19. In addition, Kwanza Online TV was suspended for 11 months in June 2020 for reposting on Instagram a health alert from the US Embassy warning of an “elevated” risk of Covid-19 in the country, which the regulator found to be misleading content that contravened professional standards, arguing that the media house had failed to verify the accuracy of the information in the alert.

On April 30, 2020 two employees of Mwananchi Communications Ltd. – Haidary Hakam and Alona Tarimo, were arrested and charged for allegedly disseminating false information about Covid-19 victims on WhatsApp groups contrary to the Cybercrime Act of 2015.

Undermining citizen participation 

These developments are reflective of how the Tanzanian authorities have used repressive laws to crack down on  journalists for doing their jobs, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. 

In a country where civil liberties have been eroded over the years, the growing hostility of the government towards dissenting opinions, including on the state’s handling of Covid-19, has forced human rights defenders, journalists, activists, the political opposition, and ordinary citizens to self-censor, and could prompt them to refrain from exercising their right to public participation.

As Tanzania prepares to go to the polls in less than ten days, the government must desist from further affronts on civil liberties, especially the right to freedom of expression and access to information, the lifeblood of any democratic society. 

1 … 43 44 45 46 47 … 70