Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Category Archives: Blog

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Blog  /  Blog
17Oct

What does the future hold for the Internet Governance Forum?

Author admin Posted on

By Juliet N. Nanfuka
As the dust settles following the ninth Internet Governance Forum (IGF) which was held in Istanbul, Turkey between 2 and 5 September, many questions remain lurking. The biggest being whether the IGF has made a strong enough case for its continued existence. The IGF currently has a mandate that takes it until 2015. The United Nations (UN) General Assembly is due to take a decision about its renewal at the beginning of December 2014.

Lillian Nalwoga (third from left), Policy Officer at CIPESA makes a comment during a panel session at the 9th IGF in Istanbul, Turkey.
Lillian Nalwoga (third from left), Policy Officer at CIPESA makes a comment during a panel session at the 9th IGF in Istanbul, Turkey.

In keeping with the IGF’s core principle of multi-stakeholder engagement, the 9th Internet Governance Forum brought together an assortment of internet policy stakeholders including multinational organisations, state representatives, civil society and internet enthusiasts. The theme of this year’s IGF was “Connecting Continents for Enhanced Multi stakeholder Internet Governance” and was explored through the lens of net neutrality, multilingualism, youth and social media, gender, policy development, stakeholder roles and other related issues.
In a series of workshops, book launches and open sessions, internet policies were discussed and how they relate and impact upon society, development, business, governance and democracy. While there was agreement on some issues, divergence remained when it came to discussions on where monetising the internet clashed with big data, privacy, surveillance, intermediary liability and net neutrality.
This year’s meeting saw over 3,000 delegates from across the world convene in a country currently battling with some of the controversial internet related issues such as surveillance, censorship, privacy and data protection under discussion at the IGF. According to the 2013 Freedom on the Net report, nearly 30,000 websites and social media accounts are blocked in Turkey for social or political reasons. But Turkish bureaucrats deftly skirted these issues in their opening and closing speeches. While mention was made of the state of Turkish internet freedom by delegates, it mostly remained a rumbling in the underbelly of the meeting. However, some light on Turkey’s internet freedom status was heavily discussed at the Internet Ungovernance Forum organised by Turkish civil society organisations to protest the country’s hosting of the meeting given their government’s internet rights violations record.
For many participants, NetMundial was still a key talking point and formed the basis of some of the IGF’s discussions including promoting multilingualism, collaborative multi-stakeholder models, gender and internet rights, minority rights online, child online protection, privacy and surveillance and developing relevant local content. NetMundial demonstrated that multi-stakeholderism is possible and consensus can be drawn even on the most contentious internet governance topics (see NetMundial statement).

NetMundial sought to deliberate on the Future of Internet Governance by crafting Internet governance principles and proposing a roadmap for the further evolution of the Internet governance ecosystem.

Even though the IGF has for the past nine years provided a platform for the debate and deliberation on the very issues that NetMundial dealt with, there have been limited discernible outcomes and impact measurements due to the nature and complexity of internet governance and its actors.
However, much like the constantly transforming internet, the IGF will have to re-asses its financial sustainability model to ensure its survival and position itself as a driver of best practices on internet governance. Part of this includes the production of outcome documents such as policy recommendations for voluntary adoption – a suggestion put forward by the European Commission – a key funder of the IGF. Such actions could help shake off the ‘talk shop’ cloak that has shadowed the IGF and position it as a platform for deliberation on global internet governance concerns with more discernible outcomes.
The Tenth IGF is scheduled to take place in João Pessoa, Brazil on 10 to 13 November 2015.

03Oct

ICT4Democracy in East Africa Network to Participate in Inaugural Buntwani Conference

Author admin Posted on

The ICT4Democracy in East Africa network will participate in the first Buntwani conference scheduled to take place October 7–8, 2014 in Nairobi, Kenya. The conference is aimed at exploring the potential of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in strengthening citizen engagement and participation in Africa.
The network is made up of organisations pursuing projects that are tackling issues such as corruption, service delivery, respect for human rights, and civic engagement in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. The shared goal is to collaboratively leverage on ICTs as tools for promoting good governance and democratisation.
As the use of ICTs in East Africa grows steadily, driven by the availability of cheaper smart phones and the popularity of social media platforms, so does the opportunity through which to utilise these very tools and platforms as avenues for transparency and accountability in governance. In Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, mobile access rates have grown to beyond 50% of the population – with Kenya reporting a 78% mobile access rate, Uganda (52%) and Tanzania (64%). Internet use has concurrently risen. Internet access in Kenya currently stands at 53% of the population, while Uganda stands at 22% and Tanzania (11%). It is upon this foundation that the ICT4Democrarcy in East Africa network pursues its work leveraging on tools including mobile messaging (short message services), FM radio, social media like Facebook and Twitter, toll free call centres, crowd sourcing platforms as well as direct community engagement.
The network is comprised of seven partner organisations including the Women of Uganda Network (WOUGNET), Transparency International Uganda (TIU), iHub Research (Kenya), the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance (Tanzania), the Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) and Toro Development Network (ToroDev). CIPESA is the regional coordinator of the network which is supported by the Swedish Programme for ICTs in Developing Regions (Spider) and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida).
Network partners primarily work with grassroots based organisations, local governments, policy makers, voluntary social accountability committees (VSACs), the tech community, civil society organisations and media in the use and promotion of ICTs in governance.
At Buntwani, the network partners will be sharing their experiences in sessions on technology for transparency, avenues for citizen participation, and the motivations and demotivations of using ICT tools for governance, among others.
Network project summaries

Partner ICT4Democracy in East Africa Project activity
CIPESA(ICT4Dem regional coordinator) The ‘iParticipate Uganda’ project aims to catalyse the role of ICTs in citizens’ engagement and participation in governance. The project documents and publicises open governance, builds the capacity of media, public officials, citizens and other duty bearers in the use of ICTs for democracy, provides support to three grassroots ICT access centres and researches the ICT knowledge, practices and attitudes of citizens in Uganda. CIPESA is also undertaking an analysis of ICT legal and regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.
CHRAGG CHRAGG has implemented a toll free Short Messaging Services (SMS) platform in Tanzania for citizens to utilise their mobile phones to lodge human rights violations and complaints. The project has targeted women and youth in its campaign which is also increasing awareness of human rights in the country. The campaign to popularise the SMS system includes radio talk shows, prime time TV and radio jingles, distribution of flyers, TV adverts as well as visual and performance acts through dance troupes.
iHub iHub is exploring the interaction between governments and citizens through ICT tools in support of civic participation, service delivery, transparency, accountability and access to information. The insights are being sought in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania through a series of field studies, focus group discussions, surveys, interactions with developers and literature reviews. The results of this work are expected to aid the implementation of initiatives that use ICT to monitor public services delivery, fight corruption and improve public sector transparency.
KHRC The mentoring of grassroots based Human Rights Networks (HURINETS) in Kenya is key to KHRC’s project. The organisation is partnering with 10 HURINETS to increase their capacities to effectively use ICTs such as crowdmaps, blogs, Twitter and Facebook in their advocacy work and to increase their role in promoting human rights.
TIU A toll free call centre forms the foundation of TIU’s Lira based project. Voluntary Accountability Committees (VACs) are playing the key role of monitoring health service delivery at health centres in remote areas in Lira and Oyam district in Northern Uganda. The project empowers citizens to demand social accountability of health workers in the region. TIU verifies reports of health service delivery challenges from VACs and the public received at the call centre through field visits before raising them with the respective authorities for remedial action.
ToroDev Working with 15 rural advocacy forums and the Rwenzori Journalists Forum, ToroDev is motivating citizen activism in Western Uganda in pursuit of transparency and accountability monitoring. Local FM radio stations are used   as hubs for information and   knowledge sharing sourced   through the internet   (social media) and   mobile phones (SMS) during which there is active engagement with local leaders and advocacy forum members on critical community issues.
WOUGNET Northern Uganda is the focus area of this project which empowers the local communities in five districts (Apac, Kole, Oyam, Gulu and Amuru) to monitor good governance and service delivery through the use of radio stations, digital cameras, mobile phones, Facebook, Twitter, blogs and the crowd sourcing platform Ushahidi. The project primarily targets women in Community Based Organisations (CBOs) and women groups.

The Buntwani conference (www.buntwani.org) will see the gathering of government officials, civil society organisations, the private sector, media and other sectoral players to share knowledge and information relating to citizen engagement and participation through ICTs. The conference will also provide a platform for technology innovators to showcase tools that are available for strengthening citizen engagement and participation as well as improvement of service delivery, and discuss with various stakeholders the strategies that have been used to make these tools a success.
Connect with ICT4Democract in East Africa online
Web: www.ict4democracy.org
Facebook: www.facebook.com/ict4dem
Twitter: @ICT4DemEA
Email: [email protected]
 
About CIPESA: ICT4Democracy in East Africa Regional Coordinator
The Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) is one of two centres established in 2004 under the Catalysing Access to Information and Communications Technologies in Africa (CATIA) initiative, which was mainly funded by the UK’s Department for International Development (DfID). CIPESA focuses on decision-making that facilitates the use of ICT in support of development and good governance. Besides the ICT4Democracy in East Africa project, CIPESA is spearheading the Open Net in Africa project (www.opennetafrica.org) to promote internet freedoms in a number of African countries, including Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda. Under the Ask Your Government Uganda initiative (www.askyourgov.ug), CIPESA, in partnership with the Office of Prime Minister (OPM) Uganda and the Africa Freedom of Information Centre (AFIC) promotes citizen’s right to access to information.

Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)Plot 156-158 Mutesa II Road, Ntinda, P.O. Box 4365, Kampala, Uganda;
Tel: +256 414 289 502 | Email: [email protected]
Website: www.cipesa.org | Facebook: www.facebook.com/cipesaug |Twitter: @cipesaug
 
25Sep

Can the media help save the Peace Recovery and Development Project?

Author admin Posted on

By Emily Mullins
In early July, the Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) met with members of the Northern Uganda Media Club (NUMEC) to discuss the Peace Recovery and Development Project (PRDP). First launched in October 2007, the PRDP sought to improve livelihoods in post-conflict Northern Uganda. Its stated objectives were to consolidate state authority, rebuild and empower communities, revitalise the economy, and to promote peace and reconciliation.
Individual projects to achieve these objectives included enhancing the rule of law, providing equipment and logistics to strengthen law enforcement, build and staff health centres, schools, and building roads, bridges, and market facilities. The plan also claimed that in the process, it would prioritise according to the concerns of the communities within which it was working.
To date, many feel that the ambitious program has not lived up to its hype and has instead been in a state of ongoing corruption and mismanagement of funds. NUMEC members presented cases of mismanagement and poor oversight, leading to devastating results. In particular, many of the contractors who were awarded construction projects implemented sub-standard work, with structures and roads crumbling after only a few years of use. NUMEC cited one example of a health centre that functioned as no more than an abandoned home once winds blew off the poorly constructed roof.

NUMEC trains journalists on how to track and report the progress of the PRDP in Northern Uganda.
NUMEC trains journalists on how to track and report the progress of the PRDP in Northern Uganda.

In other cases, contractors simply did not finish the project, cashing their cheques and abandoning the communities with half-built structures. In one such case, teachers at a PRDP-funded school are still living in overcrowded and poorly sanitised conditions, four years after permanent lodging was supposed to be built. One problem is that there is little or no accountability and oversight on these projects.
Another problem has been that of visibility. One reporter noted that citizens have difficulties knowing which programs are part of PRDP and which are non-PRDP development initiatives. The PRDP does not adequately advertise its proposed projects, so citizens may not even be aware that they should be expecting a service. When citizens are unaware of what promises the government is making to them, they have no reason to be upset when said services never appear. It leaves the government unaccountable for its actions, and wastes public funds. Without transparency on proposed projects, the people have no way to demand accountability.
The increased pushes for open data have, however, helped. For example, the PRDP has a website on which the Office of the Prime Minister – the initiative’s coordinating office – publishes budgets, workplans and reports. However, the danger in such pushes for “transparency” is that it can allow for complacency. Having marked the check box for open data, the government can avoid true accountability. Not all citizens posses the technological skills or resources to access the data and understand it. For many, the information might as well be in a different language, and in the most rural areas, where use of the English language is not as widespread, it is.
This is where the media can come in. The media serves as an intermediary between the government and the people. When the government provides the information, the media ought to have the tools to interpret the data, and turn it into something meaningful for its consumers. While rural populations may not have consistent access to the internet or social media, journalists have the opportunity to take the information from such sources and transmit it through more ubiquitous technology, such as print and radio.
With the availability of new technologies like geospatial analysis and infographics come new opportunities to tell simple, yet powerful visual stories with the data. Providing citizens with information empowers them to make better demands from public officials. As one journalist noted, “even if major news sources do not want to pick up a story, if the social media and grassroots sources generate enough buzz, they force the story to the forefront.”
This is not to say that the media should only focus on watchdogging. Reports on failures or mismanagements are important, but if the media only concentrates on the negative surrounding PRDP, it risks disengaging the public. For the public to be actively engaged, it needs to believe in the capacity for PRDP to succeed, and it especially needs to believe that its voice will be heard and that administrators will be responsive to demands. This necessitates, then, that the media seek out and also report on success stories. A hope for improvement is just as necessary to transparency as the recognition of failures.
The PRDP has the potential to help shape Northern Uganda’s recovery process, but it requires diligence from the government, the media, and citizens. It is within the power of citizens to force accountability from the government, but only if they have the right information. This is where the media can make a difference: by taking the data provided by the government, and making it relevant for the people, the media can keep the public eye on PRDP projects, both for its success and its shortcomings. The tools are there, it is only a matter of using them.
Members of NUMEC received training on the use of geospatial analysis tool, ArcGIS carried out by AidData Summer Fellow Emily Mullins who was stationed at CIPESA during June – August 2014. She holds a Masters in International Affairs from the George Bush School at the Texas A&M University, USA.

01Sep

CIPESA's Reflections on the Third Africa Internet Governance Forum, 2014

Author admin Posted on
By Lillian Nalwoga.
With the internet projected to reach almost 20 per cent of the Africa population in 2014, it becomes important to discuss modalities under which it should remain an open and reliable tool for development. It is with this background that Africa Internet stakeholders gathered in Abuja, Nigeria, July 10 -14, 2014 to deliberate on key internet governance issues affecting the continent. The main theme for this year’s meeting was “connecting continents for enhanced multi-stakeholder internet governance.”

Read More
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.

1 … 71 72 73 74 75 … 78