Tweet
By Mailyn Fidler |
At the first session of the 2016 Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa, questions about cross-border data access—usually a dry topic—took center stage. The moderator and participants grilled representatives from Google and Facebook about the fairness of limited African access to African data held by U.S. companies, invoking the need for greater “internet sovereignty.” These remarks contrasted with one year ago, when I could find no one at this forum talking about African data access problems. Africans are now thinking about this issue, but the U.S. government is not really considering Africa as it debates the future of cross-border data requests. The standards outlined in the Obama administration’s draft proposal will be most easily met by favored U.S. partners; the United Kingdom appears to be first in line for a deal. Left-out countries will have few viable options for accessing data and may turn to damaging alternatives.
Background: A Year of MLAT Reform
The past year brought cross-border data access into the limelight. Countries have grown frustrated with the primary mechanism for accessing data held by U.S. tech companies: Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs). As communications increasingly depend on U.S. tech companies, data needed for run-of-the-mill criminal investigations often resides in the United States, and countries turn to MLATs for access. MLATs with the United States generally require countries to meet U.S. legal standards when seeking data stored in the United States.
The MLAT process is usually slow and opaque, frustrating countries using it. It can take six weeks to ten months to process requests, depending on the request’s complexity and compliance with U.S. legal standards. Countries also take issue with U.S. law essentially dictating global practices. Countries have sought other troubling means of accessing data, with the UK seeking extraterritorial powers, Russia exploring data localization, and Brazil threatening companies with legal action.
Over the past year, efforts to reform cross-border data access have progressed. The United States and the United Kingdom have negotiated a proposed agreement, and the Department of Justice released draft legislation to make such agreements possible for approved countries. (The legislation is unlikely up for consideration until after the U.S. election.)
Africans Want Improved Data Access
Although Africa currently has low levels of internet penetration, it also has some of the highest internet use growth rates. Internet policy issues are increasingly important to Africans, and African internet policy wonks are joining the call for cross-border data access reform. Tefo Mohapi, the moderator of the opening panel, asked company representatives about building mirror datasets in African countries to allow African countries greater access to data held by U.S. companies, a form of data localization. “It all goes back to internet sovereignty,” Mohapi argued. “You operate with legal impunity without regard for state sovereignty.”
Participants continued to criticize the United States, adding that, “America has ceased to be the shining jewel of internet freedom” post-Snowden. African countries are often portrayed as untrustworthy and undeserving of data, even by the company representatives at this conference. Post-Snowden, African countries “want the discourse to expand beyond bad African governments, with the kind United States coming to save us.” African governments should have the same access as the now-untrustworthy United States, participants argued.
The company representatives responded to these criticisms by highlighting ongoing cross-border data access reform efforts. They emphasized that existing cross-border data access procedures are burdensome, and that they are in conversation with governments to change the process. They eagerly pointed out that ultimate responsibility for fixing this problem rests with governments, not companies.
Only two African countries, South Africa and Egypt, currently have MLATs with the United States. The proposed U.S. legislation could allow countries without MLATs to gain legal access to data (see Section 4), in theory addressing African concerns. In practice, however, it could be difficult for some African countries to meet the legislation’s legal standards. The United States must determine that a country has an independent judiciary, adequate substantial and procedural cyber laws, and adequate international human rights practices. The lack of adequate cyber laws alone would be enough to thwart most African data access agreements with the United States. More generally, the United States will likely not consider countries without MLATs a priority for new data access agreements. African countries’ general lack of political pull could considerably slow or reduce new African data access agreements.
Left Out of MLAT Reform: Potential Consequences
Cross-border data access reform is generally portrayed as the solution to the data localization laws, prosecutions of tech companies, and extraterritorial application of laws that countries have pursued when frustrated with MLATs. Most countries who have been turning to these methods, however, at least have MLATs, while African countries do not. African countries will likely be last in line for new data access agreements. Being shut out of both data access options means African countries will be twice marginalized.
African countries lacking an MLAT and a data access agreement with the United States will have few options for pursuing data. Countries can submit emergency requests to companies or ask for a joint investigation with the United States. African countries are already sensitive to concerns that they lack autonomy, and autonomy-constrained states are often most motivated to protect their autonomy. African countries might respond to their double marginalization by enacting data mirroring requirements, as the moderator at the forum suggested. Another forum participant suggested that African governments might increase internet shutdowns if they lack post-hoc data access, as a way of preemptive control. Ironically, U.S. efforts to allow countries greater access to data in the United States may result in African citizens having less access to the internet.
Cross-border data access should not be extended without qualification. Still, current reform plans seem likely to place African countries in a difficult position on a policy area that is increasingly important to them. If the United States really seeks to limit the proliferation of damaging data-access workarounds, it should think about what will happen to those who are left out of cross-border data access reform.
Mailyn Fidler is a fellow at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University. You can follow her @mailynfidler. This article was first published at Council on Foreign Relations on October 26, 2016.
Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa 2016 – My Testimony
By Blaise Ndola |
Through presentations and interventions at the Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa 2016 (FIFAfrica16),I learned about different ways Africans countries are stifling citizens digital rights. But the most important at this level is that through these presentations and experiences shared, I realized that the battle for Internet freedoms is as important as ever because internet shutdowns, abuses of courts of law, blockages of websites and content removals continue to find their place on the continent.
Coming from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), I became aware of the work I have to do as an Internet freedom fighter and web activist once back home. Apart from that, I also realized the high level of danger faced by internet users when their privacy or personal data are not protected by themselves and by intermediaries (Telecoms). We need to fight at all the levels, first against practices of telecoms who are ready to respond governments’ requests to release information of their customers and then, to call upon policy makers to enact laws that will reinforce rights of citizens to privacy and freedom of expression.
Access to the internet and internet freedom should now become fundamental rights in African societies. At the same time, we should also fight the normalization of online violence against women and for gender equity in access to digital tools.
As suggestions to African governments, they should make efforts to put in place conducive legal frame works for the ICT sector. For instance, make laws that will not be restrictive of some rights as it’s the case nowadays. And also, they shouldincreasingly respect the rights of citizens to access information, to freedom of expression and toprivacy.To intermediaries (telecoms), I suggest they remain neutral and aim to protect the privacy anddata of users of their services despite pressure from government.
To us, as part of civil society, I will suggest to continue advocating for internet freedoms in law and in practice and to require other stakeholders to respect certain fundamentals rights. Civil society, through campaigns and advocacy must raise awareness among internet users of the need for responsibility in their actions and usage of internet.
Finally, having attended two forums (2015 and 2016), I am proud to have networked and got connected to influencers and internet freedom activists in Africa and beyond. Thanks to the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) and to all the partners for facilitating my attendance.
To follow the online discussion: #FIFAfrica16 @Cipesaug
This article was first published at blaisendola on October 11, 2016.
Africa’s Internet of Things: Challenges and Opportunities
By Dorothy Mudavanhu |
The Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa 2016 served as an opportunity to gather insights from different stakeholders in the information society ecosystem towards promoting a free and safe internet. The platform was used to assemble the different perspectives and thoughts on the path that Internet Freedom should take in Africa. The Forum also gave stakeholders the opportunity to commemorate the International Day of Universal Access to Information held on September 28th every year.
There were fruitful deliberations around issues on transparency and accountability of intermediaries, internet shutdowns and internet rights, using data to track rights, working against normalisation of violence against women online, counting the cost of shutdowns and cyber security strategies for African countries, to name but a few.
Problems Highlighted
- There is a gender divide in access to ICT among women and men and a lack of policies for gender inclusion in ICT.
- Internet users are ignorant of how floating data is used hence the increase in cyber crime challenges such as fraud and online stalking.
- Crimes such as terrorism and hate speech existed long before digital platforms and in order to tackle them, cyber platforms in themselves should not be the problem governments seek to eliminate. Nonetheless, unclear jurisdictions for violators pose a challenge for law enforcement.
- More and more countries have seen the politicization and militarization of the cyber space as a means to control the free flow of information. This has seen an increase in internet shutdowns and attacks against freedom of expression, which comes at a high expense. Uganda’s two internet shutdowns during 2016 cost the economy an estimated $25 million, according to some estimates.
- Depsite privacy being a fundamental right, less than 20 countries in Africa have data protection laws.
- Who carries the burden of user awareness and understanding of terms of service for social media platforms? Users, service providers or the government? Where do we draw the line?
Positives highlighted
- Citizen awareness and engagement has increased through the use of ICT for participation in governance processes and social accountability.
- Countless businesses are dependent on digital platforms. States might/ will desist from shutdowns once they discover internet shutdowns come with an exorbitant cost to national revenue such as taxation.
- Internet penetration in Africa has increasingly bridged the gap between traditional and new media for citizens.
- Service providers such as Google, Facebook and Whatsapp are working to ensure safety and security of users for their products through innovations such as end-to-end encryption which decreases the chances of interception of communication, as well as community standards and reporting mechanisms.
Recommendations
- Continued lobbying and advocacy for access to the internet for all.
- Human rights-based approaches and principles should be integrated with campaigns for accessibility and inclusivity of the internet.
- There is need for citizens to invest more in media literacy as a way of protecting themselves against false news and misinformation.
- More media coverage of women’s voices and concerns related to the internet.
- Initiation of support spaces to work against online violence, particularly that directed against women. These spaces should be platforms for victims, and also send out positive message that deters violations online.
- Enactment and/or enforcement of all-encompassing cyber laws, through multistakeholder approach, that limit the powers of governments, ensure independent oversight, and uphold rights to privacy, among others.
- Due processes for lodging cyber complaints should be transparent, made easier and less time-consuming.
- Citizens’ access to information especially that held by governments is paramount. Civil society should take a leading role in engaging on information requests and disclosure.
- Regional cooperation should resolve issues on standardisation of ICT sectors including operator standards, market growth and quality of service.
The struggle for internet freedom calls for tenacious stakeholders that do not get weary until the global community realizes unfettered access to information.
This article was first published at Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum on October 10, 2016
Let Journalism Thrive! Towards Better Reporting, Gender Equality, and Media Safety in the Digital Age
UNESCO |
Every year, 3 May is a date which celebrates the fundamental principles of press freedom; to evaluate press freedom around the world, to defend the media from attacks on their independence and to pay tribute to journalists who have lost their lives in the exercise of their profession.
Over 100 national celebrations take place each year to commemorate this Day. UNESCO leads the worldwide celebration by identifying the global thematic and organizing the main event in different parts of world every year.
The international day was proclaimed by the UN General Assembly in 1993 following a Recommendation adopted at the 26th Session of UNESCO’s General Conference in 1991. This in turn was a response to a call by African journalists who in 1991 produced the landmark Windhoek Declaration on media pluralism and independence.
To mark the 2015 World Press Freedom day, UNESCO will lead the global celebration with a main event under the theme “Let Journalism Thrive! Towards Better Reporting, Gender Equality, and Media Safety in the Digital Age”. The event is co-organized by UNESCO and the Government of Latvia, and will take place from 2-4 May 2015 in Riga, Latvia.
The Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) will be participating in the event represented by Wairagala Wakabi as one of the speakers in the Plenary 3 Session on “Digital Safety for Journalists” on 4 May 2015. The discussions during this session will be enriched by CIPESA’s experience and expertise, particularly under its OpenNet Africa initiative.
Meanwhile, on May 2, CIPESA will convene journalists in Kampala, Uganda for digital safety training as part of its ongoing online security capacity building efforts for human rights defenders, minority groups, activists and the media in East Africa.
CIPESA's Reflections on the Third Africa Internet Governance Forum, 2014