Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Category Archives: Blog

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Blog  /  Blog
16Jul

Colonial Laws Stunt Internet Freedoms in Tanzania

Author admin Posted on

By Juliet Nanfuka
Tanzania’s port of Dar es Saalam is one of the landing stations of the Eastern Africa Submarine Cable System (EASSy). However, the country’s internet penetration rate is relatively similar to those of its landlocked neighbours such as Uganda and Rwanda. A total of 9.3 million people of the population of 45 million accessed the internet in 2013. The country has a teledensity of 61 phones per 100 inhabitants, which translates into 27.6 million mobile subscriptions.
In a fast changing socio-political, economic and technological landscape, the extent of freedoms enjoyed by Tanzanian citizens both online and offline is being stunted by government practices and colonial laws.
In June 2014, British owned telecommunications company Vodafone, which operates locally as Vodacom, disclosed that in 2013 the government of Tanzania made 98,765 requests for local subscribers’ data. According to the firm’s Law Enforcement Disclosure Report, this was the highest number of government requests made among the eight African countries where it operates. It should be noted, however, that Vodafone could not publish the requests made by Kenya and South Africa due to legal restrictions.
The company also disclosed that it had not implemented the technical requirements necessary to enable lawful interception of communications in Tanzania and had not received any demands from authorities for interception assistance. However, the country’s Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002 requires service providers to “intercept and retain a specified communication or communications of a specified description received or transmitted, or about to be received or transmitted by that communication service provider” for purposes of obtaining evidence of commission of terrorism-related offences. This law permits the admission in court of information sourced through interception.
While the 2002 law makes it permissible for the state to snoop on citizens’ communications, other laws dating as far back as the mid 1970s constrain transparency and citizens’ access to information. The National Security Act of 1970 makes it a punishable offence to investigate, obtain, possess, comment on, pass on or publish any document or information which the government considers classified.
Another Act dating from the same era is the 1976 Newspaper Act, which gives authorities powers to “exclude” any newspaper from operation in the “interest of the public”. In a 2012 case, the MwanaHalisi newspaper was banned indefinitely on allegations of publishing two seditious stories claiming that state intelligence officers were involved in the kidnapping and torture of a national strike leader. More recently in 2013, two other publications – the Mwananchi and the Mtanzania- were banned both offline and online for two weeks and three months respectively on instructions of the Directorate of Information. This followed accusations of publishing content aimed at provoking discontent between the government and public.
Although the country’s constitution provides for access to information, freedom of expression and assembly and the right to privacy, the existence of laws that sternly limit publication of government information and support interception of communications raises concern over the country’s online freedoms credentials. Besides, the absence of data protection and privacy laws to safeguard citizens’ information collected as part of mandatory subscriber registration makes online users’ vulnerable to state interference.
Nonetheless, recent government announcements of the drafting of three laws – the Cyber security Act, Data Protection Act and the Electronic Transacting Act – come as a positive step for the country in fighting cybercrime and promoting internet freedoms.
While these steps indicate some appreciation of the complex relationship between data protection and online freedom, there remain many uncertainties about free speech and press freedom in the face of interception, draconian and unclear laws, and harsh penalties – especially with vague state transparency.
Read more on the practices, legislative environment, and threats to online freedoms in Tanzania in the 2014 State of Internet Freedom in Tanzania Report prepared by CIPESA.

16Jul

Promoting E-Governance and Citizen Participation in Mayuge District, Uganda

Author admin Posted on

By Maria Nakirya
The Busoga Rural Open Source and Development Initiative (BROSDI) with support from the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) has had ongoing training this year for Mayuge district local government officials and the local education community on the creation and use of blogs as tools for community reporting on governance and service delivery.
As part of an ongoing project that focuses on e-governance and citizen participation in the education sector, blogging was one of

Participants at a training session on the use of e-governance and community participation as tools to address community issues
Participants at a training session on the use of e-governance and community participation as tools to address community issues

the tools identified by citizens to reduce the information gap that currently exists between the schools community, parents and the local government.
BROSDI conducts several trainings in social media for varying community groups and individuals. However, this was the first time that training was conducted for a group of influential persons in the community who had limited computer experience. The group was composed of head teachers, teachers, community leaders and representatives of the community of parents.
The training was aimed at equipping participants with basic knowledge and skills in computer usage –including opening email accounts as basic requirement for blogging and registration for Individual Tax Identification Number (TIN).
Participants welcomed the training which also helped them open personal email accounts, a process that they noted was simple yet some of them had paid as much as UGX 20,000 (USD 8) to have email addresses opened for them by third parties.
A separate training was held for district officials. Participants in this training had some basic computer experience but little knowledge of blogging. However, they found it a very resourceful tool to link them and other district officials to the community they serve. They were able to read and appreciate the articles written by members of the community.

“If only we knew about this before, we would have not spent so much money.”  Teacher Grace
“I have been passing at BROSDI, seeing people type on these machines but I didn’t know they can go this far.” A participant headteacher

A key outcome of both trainings was the realisation by beneficiaries that they had a lot of information and content to share which they previously did not know how to package for public consumption. This has greatly boosted their confidence levels and the
quality of blog entries produced. The blogs were shared on the project blog (http://visualizemayuge.wordpress.com)  while others created their own blogs. All training participants were eager to post blog entries and encouraged district officials to visit the blog. To ensure a wider audience, they further suggested having the blog link integrated to the district official website.

“I have a daughter abroad who gave me a telephone with all internet settings activated but did not know what to use it for. All I do is to use it for phone calls. I did not know about this internet and that it can do wonders. Will the whole world be able to read about my contribution?” Asks a participant teacher during a training session.
“I didn’t know that I would interact with the community in a different way and I think this works especially in our area where coming to the district is a big problem.” Noted a teacher after a training session

The trainings are part of CIPESA’s wider iParticipate project. In partnership with BROSDI as well as the Northern Uganda Media Club (NUMEC) and eSociety Kasese, ongoing activities are aimed at using ICTs to facilitate better delivery of government services to citizens, empower citizens through access to information, and improve interactions between citizens and public officials.
The project is supported by the Swedish Development Agency (Sida) and the Swedish Programme for ICT in Developing Regions (Spider).
 

20Jun

Uganda: When National Security Trumps Citizens’ Internet Freedoms

Author admin Posted on

The Ugandan telecommunications sector was liberalised in 1998, resulting in an influx of service providers – there are currently four major mobile telecom operators and more than 30 Internet Service Providers (ISPs). The establishment of a Uganda Internet Exchange Point (UIXP) allows for local internet traffic routing, increased speeds and lower costs. The regulatory body reports a teledensity of 52 phones per 100 inhabitants and an internet penetration rate of 20%.
Ugandans have embraced social media as an alternative means of communication with their peers as well as for engaging with government. This is seen in the increase in the popularity of social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Youtube and Blogspot, which are ranked among the top 10 most visited websites in Uganda. As such the government has developed social media guidelines to aid its ministries, agencies and departments in communicating and engaging with citizens online.
However, as the telecommunications sector grows, so have the number of laws passed to regulate it. Some of these laws have drawn criticism from internet actors both locally and internationally due to their severity, infringement on human rights and contradictions with other existing legislation, including the constitution.

“No person shall be subjected to interference with the privacy of that person’s home, correspondence, communication or other property.”

Article 27 (2) of Ugandan Constitution

The use of ICTs in Uganda is threatened by the very laws that are meant to both protect citizens and ensure their rights. The Regulation of Interception of Communications Act, 2010, the Anti-Terrorism Act No.14 of 2002, the Anti-Pornography Act of 2014 and the Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2014 have undercurrents of surveillance, content filtering, and monitoring.
Although these laws are guised under provisions aimed to protect national security or fight cybercrime, in effect they may serve to silence voices critical to the state. Ultimately, these provisions are resulting in self-censorship by both ordinary online users and the media.
Provisions in the Electronic Transactions Act of 2011 limit the liability of ISPs for users’ content and do not require them to monitor stored or transmitted data including for unlawful activity. However, other laws place ISPs at a cross roads of service provision and protection of subscriber information. They are required to lawfully release users’ data to state agencies for purposes such as fighting terrorism and cybercrime. Moreover, the Anti-Pornography Act (2014) requires them to monitor, filter and block content of a pornographic nature.
In the absence of a data protection and privacy law, just like other countries in East Africa (State of Internet Freedom in East Africa), users’ data is vulnerable to mishandling and abuse by the state and ISPs. These vulnerabilities are also transferred to the offline world where freedom of expression and assembly have not been spared as seen in the limiting provisions under the Public Order Management Act, 2013.
It should be noted that the Ugandan government recently announced plans to draft a Data Protection and Privacy Bill. This is a positive step toward the protection of personal information and its use by the government and the private sector.
Read more in the 2014 Internet Freedom in Uganda Report prepared by CIPESA under the OpenNet Africa initiative. The report provides a status of the legislative environment and threats to internet freedoms in the country.

20Jun

Internet Freedom in Kenya: Balancing Hate Speech And Free Speech

Author admin Posted on

By Juliet N. Nanfuka
As of May 2014, up to 52% of Kenya’s population had access to the internet. This was much higher than in other East African countries, where less than a quarter of the population had access to the internet. Most of the Kenyan population accessed the internet through mobile phones whose own popularity was partly driven by M-Pesa, a mobile phone based financial services system designed by local developers. Currently, Kenya has a mobile teledensity of 77% facilitated by four mobile service providers.
Kenya’s democratic credentials have been improving in recent years, owing to a new liberal constitution and various transparency and governance reforms. The 2010 constitution redistributed power, including that of the president, which for many years had been a highly divisive matter. However, some of the country’s laws as well as recent reforms undermine freedom of expression, including online. This is a familiar occurrence in East African countries, according to the recently released State of Internet Freedoms in East Africa Report.
The use of ICTs In Kenya has brought to the fore the problem of hate speech resulting from ethnic tensions which have polarised the country for decades. Hate speech became most apparent during the 2007 post-election period during which short message service (SMS) fuelled political conflict and ethnic based violence. More than 1,200 people were killed in the aftermath of the elections. A key concern since 2007 has been the movement of hate speech from SMS to social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.
The lead up to the country’s March 2013 presidential elections saw the increased use of social media platforms by both citizens and politicians for campaign purposes, civic engagement, and communication, among others. Parallel to this was resurgence of hate speech online. This resulted in the government enacting laws to control hate speech both online and offline. For instance, the National Cohesion and Integration Act of 2008 criminalises the use of speech including words, programs, images or plays that are “threatening, abusive or insulting…” and “with the intent to stir up ethnic hatred…” (Section 13). This Act was supported by the Communications Amendment Act 2009 which also criminalises similar behaviour.
It was also during the elections period that 14 bloggers were sought by Kenyan authorities. Six of them were charged with posting “annoying” statements on social networks under Article 29(b) of the 2009 Kenya Information and Communications Act that prohibits the transmission of a message that is known “to be false for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another person”.
Additional actions included the monitoring of social media especially in the lead up to the 2013 elections as well as the issuance of regulations that required service providers to vet political bulk SMS content before rejecting or sending it.
While these actions and related legal provisions are aimed at controlling hate speech, they have had an impact on intermediary liability, free speech and media freedom online, as well as on privacy of communications. This is somewhat similar to Rwanda where freedom of expression has been curbed and online media heavily regulated in the wake of the 1994 genocide, during which traditional media fuelled ethnic tensions [See State of Online Freedom in Rwanda].
However, it should be noted that it is not only the need to fight hate speech online or to defuse ethnic polarisation more generally that has impeded internet freedoms in Kenya. In 2013, the Kenya Communications and Information (Amendment) Act, 2013 and the Media Council Act 2013 were amended but came with provisions that restrict media freedom and general freedom of expression. Further attempts were made by parliament to pass laws that restrict the operations of non-government organisations.
Kenya is faced with the tough challenge of controlling hate speech online without infringing on freedom of expression and privacy. Vague definitions of what constitutes hate speech and unclear provisions on the procedures for taking legal action against accused individuals leaves the gateway open for uncalled for legal action against those voicing legitimate opinion.
Read more on the practices, legislative environment, and threats to online freedoms in Kenya in the 2014 Internet Freedom in Kenya Report prepared by CIPESA under the OpenNet Africa Initiative.

19Jun

Open Data: Can it Play a Role in Poverty Eradication?

Author admin Posted on

By Emily Mullins
Open data is widely believed to have the potential to positively influence transparent and accountable governance across the world including in developing countries like Uganda. But how can open data help in eradicating poverty? This was the focus of a workshop hosted by Development Initiatives (DI) and Development Research and Training (DRT) on June 5, 2014 in Kampala, Uganda.
The workshop served as the presentation of research findings comparing Kenya and Uganda on how current open data initiatives in the two countries are contributing to poverty eradication and how such initiatives could be strengthened.
Bernard Sabiti, Program Officer at DRT, said although the study found no immediately clear link between open data and poverty eradication in Kenya and Uganda, this did not rule out the possibility for future linkage. He noted that in Kenya, ICT sector growth had driven increased government openness, with initiatives such as the Kenya Open Data portal promoting access to resource allocation information. However, up-to-date data and information remained unavailable. In Uganda, accessibility to public information was limited due to an underdeveloped ICT sector and reliance by government departments on traditional means of information sharing. While Kenya’s Right to Information law remained in draft form and Uganda’s 2005 Access to Information law remained largely unimplemented, accessibility of information in the two countries was further hampered by the rural-urban divide in literacy, access and use of digital technologies.
The study found that often, actors such as civil society, the private sector, the tech community, media, citizens, and academia work in isolation, producing good data but failing to collaborate to extend its usefulness and impact. It suggested that these actors should work more with the government to explore ways that open data can positively influence policy decisions to eradicate poverty.
In Kenya, Mr. Sabiti said, stakeholders and beneficiaries needed to be encouraged to utilise the available data, while encouraging government to open up more data. In Uganda, initial focus needed to be on financial investment in open data processes and capacity building particularly at central government level to implement and strengthen existing access to information frameworks.
However, Charles Lwanga-Ntale, Regional Director of DI Africa, emphasised that open data should not be seen as an end in itself but as a means to reducing poverty. He argued that open data can play a role if the quality, quantity and accessibility of information available to monitor economic, social and environment performance at the national and global levels can enable governments and citizens to track development progress better and to make more informed decisions.
Mr. Lwanga-Ntale said advancements and increase in use of ICTs had created greater demand for openness in Kenya and Uganda. Accordingly, governments needed to take positive steps by embracing open practices and amending policies that restrict access to public information.
“Many political leaders fear openness, and they are attempting to hold onto power in a space that is becoming less and less easy for them to control. Those who tend to favour open data generally come from lower ranks, and have less influence in decision making,” he said.
The utility and appropriateness of data in the public domain emerged as key themes during open floor discussions. One workshop participant questioned whether the youth in the two countries were interested in engaging with open data, or if the information provided was simply too overwhelming to be used effectively by ordinary citizens. Another asked whether the intended recipients of data were being adequately engaged in determining exactly what data they want or need.
Many agreed that these questions raised significant challenges: that open data initiatives sometimes fall into the trap of mass information dumping without consideration of how the information can be utilised. Since data collection can be expensive, such mass data dumps are neither productive nor efficient because the intended beneficiaries remain unable to engage with the information and it remains un-used.
As a means to overcome this, participants said there was a need for more discussion with proposed consumers of data and for data producers to try not to assume the needs of users. The importance of engaging infomediaries such as the media, civil society and community based organisations so that they interact and translate the data for the wider populace was highlighted. Doing so could help create visual aids and simple, meaningful data that more citizens can understand.
Indeed, as pointed out by Vincent Bagiire, Chair of the ICT Committee in the Ugandan Parliament in his key note address at the workshop, a significant challenge to open data in countries like Uganda and Kenya was the tendency for initiatives to rely “too much on the internet” yet citizens as the intended beneficiaries were predominantly based in rural areas where internet access was low.
Sam Mutabazi, the Executive Director of Uganda Road Sector Support Initiative, provided an example of the utility of open data in resource allocation. He presented on prevailing issues in the road sector, such as mismanagement and poor quality control. He argued that open contracting – the disclosure of information on tendering, performance and project status in the sector – could help increase public engagement in monitoring implementation and thus better quality roads.
Overall, the workshop showed that while open data has not been fully realised in East Africa, there was significant potential for it to contribute to overcoming poverty. A lack of funding, especially in Uganda, and internet accessibility issues serve as major barriers to data openness, but the growing youth population, with their tech savviness, have the capacity to demand greater data openness from their governments. Meanwhile, a “unified movement” of multiple stakeholders need to come together to establish and understand the needs of open data consumers and producers so that the data provided can be fully utilised by all not only toward good governance but also overcoming poverty in the respective countries.
Emily Mullins is a 2014 AidData Summer Fellow stationed at CIPESA where she is engaged in geocoding methodology and training. She holds a Masters in International Affairs from the George Bush School at the Texas A&M University, USA.

1 … 64 65 66 67 68 … 71