Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Tag Archives: CIPESA

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  CIPESA
WSIS 2025
18Jun

The opportunity for Africa to take a leadership role in the WSIS+20 review process

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Elonnai Hickok (GNI), Anriette Esterhuysen (APC), and Lillian Nalwoga (CIPESA)

Alongside the Africa School for Internet Governance (AfriSIG) and the regional Africa Internet Governance Forum (AfricaIGF) that took place in late May in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania, the Global Network Initiative (GNI), the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), and the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) held several meetings that brought together civil society, governments, parliamentarians, and the private sector from across the continent to reflect on Africa’s role in the World Summit on the Information Society +20 (WSIS+20) Review Process . This included a session at the AfriSIG, the regional workshop “The Road to WSIS+20”, and the session “Forging connections between Internet Governance, human rights, and development through the WSIS+20 process” at the AfricaIGF. The meetings highlighted key policy priorities across countries that stakeholders would like reflected in the WSIS+20 review process, surfaced challenges in past implementation of the WSIS framework and action lines with forward-looking recommendations, and emphasized the opportunity for Africa to play a leadership role in the WSIS+20 review process going forward. 

In 2025, the world faces an important moment for digital governance. The WSIS+20 review — marking two decades since the World Summit on the Information Society — will not only evaluate past progress but also shape the future of Internet governance, rights, and development as it considers how to align the Global Digital Compact (GDC) into the WSIS process and evaluates the renewal of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). For Africa, this is a pivotal opportunity to lead, to center the continent’s priorities in global digital discourse, and to champion a people-centered, equitable information society.

Since its founding documents — the Geneva Declaration, the Plan of Action, and the Tunis Agenda — the WSIS has put forward a vision rooted in multistakeholderism, human rights, and inclusive digital development. But nearly 20 years on, that vision is under question amid accelerating technological shifts, geopolitical tensions, billions of people without meaningful connectivity, and the marginalization of voices from the Global Majority. Africa’s leadership in the WSIS+20 review process will be an essential counterbalance to these challenges.

Africa has always participated strongly in WSIS, with robust contributions from the technical community, civil society, many governments, and the WSIS prize winners who have taken high-level action lines and worked to implement them at the local community level. Recent months have seen growing momentum across the continent for the WSIS+20 review process. From Dar-es-Salaam to Cotonou, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) has convened civil society, governments, parliamentarians, and the private sector to reflect on Africa’s role in the WSIS. This has been complemented by national-level dialogues driven by civil society with participation from the technical community, including in Zambia, Ghana, and South Africa. These dialogues reveal national-level priorities and the potential for Africa to shape the future of the WSIS.

Two major declarations — the Dar es Salaam Declaration and the Cotonou Declaration — highlight Africa’s vision for the WSIS. They underscore issues central to the region: bridging the digital divide, fostering AI innovation, building resilient digital public infrastructure, ensuring data governance, and using the WSIS as a catalyst for Agenda 2063 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Crucially, both declarations reaffirm the importance of the IGF and call for its strengthening.

The global WSIS+20 Preparatory and Stocktaking Meeting held on May 30 gave us some insight into the positions that African countries will take. Statements by Uganda, South Africa, and Morocco aligned with the G77’s call for digital sovereignty and technology transfer, recognized the importance of leveraging the WSIS to achieve the 2030 Agenda, called for aligning the GDC with the WSIS, and highlighted new challenges such as AI, but stopped short of unanimously advocating for the renewal, strengthening, and making the mandate of the IGF permanent.  

The geopolitical landscape only heightens the urgency of strong participation from African countries. The United States’ controversial stance during the 28th session of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) — particularly its resistance to language on climate, the SDGs, and diversity, equity, and inclusion — has raised alarms. While this may signal a shift in the U.S. government’s approach, it also can be seen as opening space for Africa and other actors to step into leadership roles and push for a rights-based digital future that reflects national priorities.

To do so, Africa must bring vision and coordinated diplomacy. The continent has several key regional frameworks and strategies: the African Digital Compact, the Digital Transformation Strategy for Africa, the African Union Convention on Cyber Security, and the Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy offer policy blueprints for the continent’s digital development. The African Commission on Human and People’s Rights has also passed several important resolutions including the Resolution on Access to Data 2024 and the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression 2019.  There is an opportunity to actively inject these priorities and values into global processes like the WSIS+20 and the GDC.

Nationally, progress is tangible. Countries are expanding digital public infrastructure, reforming cybersecurity laws, and working to reduce connectivity gaps. At the same time, challenges persist — from Internet shutdowns and online surveillance to shrinking civic space and rising digital authoritarianism, as highlighted in Paradigm Initiative’s 2024 Londa report. These challenges underscore why a rights-respecting, multistakeholder framework is essential for Africa’s digital future.

As the WSIS+20 review process continues, it will be critical that African countries actively engage in the process, emphasizing inclusive multistakeholder participation from all stakeholders as articulated by a cross-stakeholder group in the Five-Point Plan for an Inclusive WSIS+20 Review and a further set of eight recommendations. Going forward, the UNECA and the African Union will play an essential role in not only coordinating regional positions but in ensuring this participation. 

The WSIS+20 presents a timely chance for Africa to take forward the original spirit of the WSIS: a digital world built by and for the people, across sectors and borders. To seize this moment, it will be important for African governments and regional bodies to:

  1. Participate robustly and cohesively in the WSIS+20 review process, ensuring Africa’s priorities are reflected.
  2. Promote inclusive multistakeholder engagement, proactively engaging with and empowering civil society, academia, and the technical community to robustly participate in the WSIS+20 process and inform the position of African governments.
  3. Advance a shared agenda rooted in human rights, sustainable development, the renewal of the IGF,  the alignment of the GDC into the WSIS, and Africa-centric innovation and development.

The discussions at AfricaIGF indicated an important opportunity for Africa to shape the future of the WSIS process and ensure country-level and regional priorities are reflected in the review and implementation, that the review process is truly multistakeholder, and results in implementation that is meaningful and effective. 

25Mar

CIPESA-Run ADRF Awards USD 140,000 to Eleven Digital Democracy Non-Profits Amidst Funding Cuts

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Ashnah Kalemera |

With many funders shifting their funding priorities about human rights, governance and livelihood issues, African Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), human rights defenders and activists have been severely impacted. As a result, critical programming on civic participation, tech accountability, digital rights and digital inclusion, which was scoring wins in the face of growing authoritarianism on the continent, has been crippled. 

In response to this changing funding landscape, the Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF) managed by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) has awarded USD 140,000 to eleven non-profit organisations as bridging funds. The discretionary awards are aimed at bridging the gap in operations and programming faced by CIPESA’s past and present partners and subgrantees. The funds bring to USD one million the total awarded by CIPESA under the  ADRF initiative since its launch in April 2019.

According to CIPESA’s Executive Director, Dr. Wairagala Wakabi, “anchor institutions such as CIPESA have lost funding and that means many crucial but smaller actors across the continent have equally been affected”. Nonetheless, CIPESA is committed to “defending digital democracy amidst the steady  democratic regression we are witnessing, and the cruciality of funding organisations that are battling rising authoritarianism cannot be overemphasised,” said Wakabi.

The recipient organisations work on various digital democracy issues in 10 countries – Cote d’Ivorie, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo), Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique, Senegal, Somalia, South Sudan, Uganda and Zambia. These organisations work on catalytic issues in difficult contexts and have established track records. The selection of beneficiaries was guided by a survey on the impact of funding termination by the United States (US) government. 

Round Nine ADRF Beneficiaries:

  1. Action et Humanisme – based in Cote d’Ivoire, the organisation works to advance digital accessibility for persons with disabilities. 
  2. Agora, an online activism initiative focused on social accountability in Uganda.
  3. Bloggers of Zambia, whose motto is “Keeping Online Spaces Open” and is pushing for progressive legislative reforms in Zambia.
  4. Digital Rights Frontlines (formerly DefyHateNow), which is at the frontline of countering hate speech and disinformation online in South Sudan.
  5. Digital Shelter, a Somali group working to advance the digital civic space.
  6. Forum de Organizacoes de Pessoas com Deficiencia – FAMOD, which works to promote the rights of persons with disabilities in Mozambique, including the right to information through web accessibility and inclusion through affordable access to technology.
  7. Inform Africa, a media integrity hub in Ethiopia.
  8. Jonction, a Senegalese digital rights advocacy organisation.
  9. Thraets, a tech research lab focused on elections integrity and Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated content.
  10. Rudi International, a Congolese digital rights advocacy and digital literacy organisation.
  11. Tanda Community Network, based in Kibera, Nairobi, Kenya, the community network is championing work against Technology Facilitated Gender Based Violence (TFGBV) alongside efforts to bridge the digital divide.

The survey revealed that following the suspension and eventual termination of U.S. funding, many organisations had reduced the scope of their activities, scaled back staff salaries and benefits, and in a number of cases laid off staff. Over 90% of the organisations surveyed  were uncertain about their ability to maintain operations beyond two months. Only one of the surveyed organisations said it would remain fully operational if it did not receive additional funding.

A staggering 92% of respondents had reduced programming scope and one in three respondent organisations reported that they had slashed staff. For one recipient, over 60% of the team was “not able to continue working in any capacity going forward”. The percentage of US funding was between 20% and 60% of the annual budgets of the organisations surveyed.

Even in the face of a grim funding future, civil society organisations that face harassment and operate in volatile political environments remain resilient. As the head of one of the grant beneficiary organisations stated: “Unfortunately, we do not have the luxury to cease activities”. The same unwavering commitment to continue operations was demonstrated by the DR Congo-based recipient whose digital literacy training centre was robbed during the January 2025 rebel attacks in Goma.

The ADRF provides financial support to organisations and networks to overcome barriers to accessing funding and building a stronger movement of digital and human rights advocates in Africa. The Fund has also built the capacity of initiatives in advocacy, public communication, research and data-for-advocacy. Supported initiatives commend the ADRF as a unique funding initiative that has broken ranks with traditional funders’ structure. See previous ADRF recipients here.

The discretionary round of the ADRF was supported by funding from the Skoll Foundation, the Wellspring Philanthropic Fund and the Ford Foundation. Other supporters of the ADRF in the past include the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), the German Society for International Cooperation Agency (GIZ), the Omidyar Network, the Hewlett Foundation, the Open Society Foundations and New Venture Fund (NVF).

Surveillance
12Mar

The Surveillance Footprint in Africa Threatens Privacy and Data Protection

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Edrine Wanyama 

Digital and physical surveillance by states, private companies that develop technology or supply governments and unscrupulous individuals globally and across Africa is a major threat to the digital civic space and operations of civil society organisations (CSOs), human rights defenders (HRDs), activists, political opposition, government critics and the media. The highly intrusive technology, which is often facilitated by biometric data collection systems such as for processing of national identification documents, voter cards, travel documents, mandatory SIM card registration and the installation of CCTV cameras for “smart cities”, adversely impacts the digital civic space. 

Given these developments, the Digital Rights Alliance Africa (DRAA), a network of CSOs, media, lawyers and tech specialists from across Africa that seeks to champion digital civic space and counter threats to digital rights on the continent, recently held a learning session on “Understanding Surveillance Trends, Threats and Challenges for Civil Society.” The Alliance was created by the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL) and the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) in response to rising digital authoritarianism. It currently has members from more than 12 countries, who collectively conduct research and advocacy and share experiences around navigating digital threats and influencing strategic digital policy reforms in line with the alliance’s outcome declaration. 

The virtual learning session built capacity among the Alliance members to better understand digital surveillance and the related threats facing democracy actors. Discussions delved into the nature of surveillance, the regulatory environment, and strategies to navigate and counter surveillance risks and threats. The threats and risks include harassment, arbitrary arrests, persecution and prosecution on trumped up charges. 

While emphasising the need to understand emerging surveillance technologies, ecosystem and deployment tactics, Richard Ngamita, the Team Leader at Thraets, highlighted the huge investment (estimated at USD 1 billion annually) which African governments have made in acquiring surveillance technologies from China, Israel, the United States of America and Europe. Ngamita urged CSOs, HRDs and other actors to build digital security capacity to protect against illegal surveillance.

Victoria Ibezim-Ohaeri, the Executive Director of Spaces for Change, while referencing the  Proliferation of Dual-Use Surveillance Technologies in Nigeria: Deployment, Risks & Accountability – Spaces for Change report, highlighted weak regulation and unaccountable practices by states that facilitate unlawful surveillance across the continent and their implications on rights. According to the report,

“The greatest concern around surveillance technologies is their potential misuse for political repression and human rights abuses. Surveillance practices also undermine the citizens’ dignity, autonomy, and security, translating to significant reductions in citizens’ agency. Agency reductions are magnified by the state’s power to punish dissent. This creates a chilling effect as citizens self-censor or avoid public engagement for fear of being surveilled or punished. The citizens have little agency to challenge or resist the state’s surveillance because of low digital literacy, poverty and broader limitations in access to justice.”

Michaela Shapiro, the Global Engagement and Advocacy Officer at Article 19, United Kingdom, discussed the governing norms of surveillance globally while paying particular attention to the common gaps that need policy action at the country level in Africa. Recalling the intensification of digital and physical surveillance as part of state responses to curb the spread of Covid-19 in the absence of clear oversight mechanisms, Michaela emphasised the role of CSOs in advocating for data and privacy protection. 

To-date, the leading instrument of data protection on the continent, the African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection has only 16 ratifications out of 55 states, while only 36 states have enacted specific laws on privacy and data protection rights.

Surveillance in Africa generally poses a major threat to individuals’ data and privacy rights since governments exercise wide access over the data subjects’ rights. National security and the loopholes in the laws are usually exploited to abuse and violate data rights. While there are regional and international standards, these are often overlooked with governments taking measures that are not provided for by the law, rendering them unlawful, arbitrary and disproportionate under human rights law. 

By way of progressive actions, speakers noted and made recommendations to States and non-state actors to the effect that:

States and Governments 

  • Address surveillance and bolster personal data and privacy protections through adopting robust legal and regulatory frameworks and repealing restrictive digital laws and policies.
  • Promote and enhance transparency and accountability through the establishment of independent surveillance oversight boards.
  • Strictly regulate the use of surveillance technologies by law enforcement and intelligence agencies to ensure accountability.
  • Collaborate with other countries to develop harmonised privacy standards within the established regional and international standards to have settled positions on cross-border controls on surveillance.

Civil Society Organisations

  • Build and enhance capacities of HRDs and other players in data governance and accountability to equip them with knowledge to counter common data privacy threats by governments and corporate entities.
  • Push for ethical and responsible use of technology to prevent and minimise technology-related violations. 
  • Challenge all forms of unlawful use of surveillance practices through legal action by, among others, taking legal actions.

Tech Sector

  • Conduct regular audits and impact assessments to address potential privacy breaches and enhance accountability and transparency. 
  • Prioritise privacy and integrate privacy protections into their products and services including data collection minimisation and establish strong security measures for privacy.
  • Prioritise ethical considerations in the development and deployment of new technologies to guarantee strong protections against potential violations.

AN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ECO-SYSTEM FOR UGANDA
14Feb

Policy Alternatives for an Artificial Intelligence Ecosystem in Uganda

Author CIPESA Posted on

CIPESA |

Economic projections show that by 2030, artificial intelligence (AI) will add USD 15.7 trillion to the global economy. Of this, USD 1.2 trillion will be generated in Africa and could boost the continent’s Gross Domestic Product by 5.6%. Despite AI’s transformative potential, there are concerns about the risks it poses to individuals’ rights and freedoms. There is therefore a need to foster a trusted and ethical AI ecosystem that elicits peoples’ confidence while guaranteeing an enabling atmosphere for innovation, to best harness AI for the greater public good for all. 

The discussion on AI in Uganda is still in early stages. Nonetheless, the country needs to develop a comprehensive and AI-specific legal and institutional governance framework to provide for regulatory oversight over AI and the diverse actors in the AI ecosystem. Currently, various pieces of legislation, which majorly focus on general-purpose technologies, constitute the legal framework relevant to AI. However, these laws do not provide sufficient regulatory cover to AI, its associated benefits and mitigation of risks to human security, rights and freedoms. 

In a new policy brief, the Collaboration on ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) reviews the AI policymaking journeys of various countries, such as Kenya, South Africa, Singapore, Luxembourg, France and Germany, and proposes 11 actions Uganda could take to fulfil its aspiration to effectively regulate and harness AI.

The existing key policy frameworks include the Uganda Vision 2040, which emphasises the importance of Science, Technology, Engineering and Innovation (STEI) as critical drivers of economic growth and social transformation; and the National Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) Strategy that aims to accelerate Uganda’s development into an innovative, productive and competitive society using 4IR technologies, with  emphasis on  using AI in the public sector to improve financial management and tax revenue collection. Meanwhile, the third National Development Plan (NDP III) identifies the promotion of digital transformation and the adoption of 4IR technologies, including AI, as critical components for achieving Uganda’s vision of becoming a middle-income country. 

The legal frameworks that impact AI-related oversight include the Constitution that lays out crucial benchmarks for the regulation of AI. It provides for the role of the state in stimulating agricultural, industrial, technological and scientific development by adopting appropriate policies and enacting enabling legislation. The constitution also provides for the right to privacy, freedom from discrimination, and the right to equality. 

Other key laws include the Data Protection and Privacy Act of 2019 which, even if it was not drafted with AI in mind, is directly relevant to the regulation of AI technologies through the lens of data protection. The Computer Misuse Act of 2011 provides a framework that addresses unlawful use of computers and electronic systems. Relevant to the governance of AI is section 12, which criminalises unauthorised access to a computer or electronic system.  

The National Information Technology Authority, Uganda (NITA-U) Act offers a foundation for improving infrastructure to support AI regulation efforts, and  established NITA-U, a body responsible for regulating, coordinating, and promoting information technology in the country. 

Overall, the current policy and legal framework, however fragmented, provides a starting point for enacting comprehensive, AI-specific legislation.

The growing adoption of AI brings a host of opportunities that positively impact society, including improved productivity and efficiency for individuals, the health sector, civil society organisations, the media, financial institutions, manufacturing industries, supplier chains, agriculture, climate and weather research and academia. AI is also being used by public agencies such as Uganda Revenue Authority to support more effective revenue collection. Uganda’s telecommunications operators are also utilising AI, for example to send targeted messages that encourage users to subscribe to loan offers such as Airtel Wewole and MTN MoKash..

Prospects for AI Regulation in Uganda

As Uganda’s journey of AI adoption and usage gains traction, the following guiding actions that underlie progressive AI frameworks across various countries could help quicken and offer direction to Uganda’s AI aspirations.

  1. Establishment of an AI governance institutional framework to guide the national adoption and usage of AI.
  2. Development and implementation of a “living” framework of best practices on AI that operates across the diverse sectors affected by AI. Singapore provides a best practice in this regard where, as a national agenda, there is consistent codification of best practices that inform the safe evolution of AI in the different spheres. The best practices framework allows for complementing of the regulatory framework. By adopting this best practice framework, Uganda would keep up with the evolution of AI without necessarily undertaking statutory amendments especially in the AI/technology world where there are rapid changes. 
  3. Implementation of checks and balances through the creation of specific policies, regulations, guidelines, and laws to manage AI effectively and address the existing significant gaps in its regulation and oversight. To address this, key stakeholders – including the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance, the Uganda Communications Commission, NITA-U, and the Personal Data Protection Office – must collaborate to develop comprehensive and tailored regulations. This effort should focus on understanding AI’s specific dynamics, impacts, and challenges within the Ugandan context and not wholesomely adopting or replicating legislation from other jurisdictions, given the divergences in context at continental, regional and national levels.
  4. Tap into the African AI Frameworks for Inspiration. Drawing on regional and international frameworks, such as the African Union’s AI Policy and the European Union’s AI Act, will offer key strategic guidelines and intervention measures to shape a robust and effective AI legislation in Uganda. 
  5. Establish a National Research and Innovative Fund on AI to effectively tap into and harvest the dividends that come with AI. This kind of funding requiring direct government intervention is informed by the reality that surrounds the high levels of uncertainty of outcomes in tech  innovation. 
  6. Develop and implement a National Strategy for AI to enhance policy coordination and coherence and offer direction and guidance. This would encompass the national vision for AI in Uganda’s social and economic development, and guide all other initiatives on progressive AI regulation.
  7. Develop and implement a National Citizenry Awareness and Public Education Programme on AI to better prepare citizens to engage with AI responsibly, ensure inclusion and advocate for ethical practices.
  8. Apply human rights protective AI to influence the designing of AI systems with fairness, transparency, and accountability, and employ diverse and representative datasets to mitigate biases related to ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status.
  9. Establish  a mechanism that can enforce ethical use of AI by the various stakeholders, including through emphasising transparency and accountability in AI deployment.
  1. Establish cyber security protocols to counter inherent vulnerability to cyber-attacks and other attendant digital security risks that come with AI.  
  2. Create a conducive atmosphere for citizenry platforms for AI engagements. These platforms can be conduits for encouraging best practices, and latest research information among other emerging issues on AI that could benefit the country. An AI ecosystem should thus favour and strategically support such inter-agency, inter-sector and public-private collaboration and formal linkages to also facilitate AI technology transfer from explorations, studies and innovation to actual application.

Read the full brief here.

31Jan

African Women’s Digital Safety: From Resolution to Reality

Author CIPESA Posted on

Edrine Wanyama |

Amplifying the Resolution on the Protection of Women Against Digital Violence in Africa: Towards Meaningful Actions by States

Two and a half years after the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) adopted the Resolution on the Protection of Women Against Digital Violence in Africa, its implementation remains a pipe dream. With Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV) continuing to proliferate across the continent, the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) is challenging African governments to use the occasion of International Women’s Day to commit to taking legislative and practical measures to implement this pivotal resolution.

ACHPR/Res. 522 (LXXII) 2022 is important as it offers ground breaking approaches to addressing digital violence against women on the African continent.  While the digital realm should be a space of innovation and empowerment, it has become a battleground where women face harassment, intimidation, and violence. The non-consensual sharing of intimate images, sexist hate speech, misogynistic disinformation campaigns, cyberstalking, cyber bullying, cyber flashing, unsolicited sexually explicit content, doxing, deep fakes, trolling and mansplaining have steadily increased and contributed to a growing digital gender divide in Africa. 

This digital gender divide further exacerbates existing inequalities and hinders progress towards achieving gender equality in the region, stripping girls and women of their voices and hindering meaningful participation in online discourse. The inequalities also hinder the attainment of Sustainable Development Goals, including Goal 5 that, among others, aims to advance gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls as a prerequisite for development.

Given the snail-speed implementation of the 2022 Resolution, in 2024  the Commission adopted another resolution, ACHPR/Res.591 (LXXX) 2024, which mandates the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Women in Africa and the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa to undertake a study on the causes, manifestations, and impacts of digital violence against women in Africa. It also aims to further the development of comprehensive norms and standards to assist countries ​in ​address​ing TFGBV.  

This Resolution underscores the need to fulfill Article 9 of the African Charter on free expression and access to information, and Article 4 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa on the rights to life, integrity and security of the person of the woman. 

According to CIPESA’s Programme Manager, Ashnah Kalemera, governments are not to be reminded of their obligations with regards to gender equity online but should take all the necessary measures and “accelerate actions including adopting appropriate laws to address TFGBV.” 

While TFGBV has become a major global challenge, many approaches adopted to tackle it on the continent either fall short of the capability to hold those responsible for rights violations accountable, or focus on curtailing the digital civic spaces. For example, electoral periods such as in Uganda have  witnessed  multiple reports of targeted online violence against women, with some existing laws on cybercrime often targeting the female victims and not the perpetrators of gender-based violence online.

In a recent report on Kenya, almost 90% of young adults enrolled in tertiary institutions in the country’s capital Nairobi have reportedly suffered gender-based violence in online spaces, with 39% having experienced the harms personally. These harms, according to the study, are more pronounced amongst females (64.4%) in comparison to males (35.5%). Meanwhile, sexism and sexualisation of content such as in Zimbabwe and Uganda, attacks on female journalists in Ghana, Namibia and Tanzania, the harassment of female journalists in South Africa and against women in politics  in Kenya continually undermined their political and public affairs.

Guided by this year’s theme, Accelerate Actions to commemorate International Women’s Day, CIPESA calls on African governments to undertake the following actions to implement Resolution ACHPR/Res. 522 (LXXII) 2022.

Adopt Gender-Sensitive Legal and Policy Frameworks

Adoption of gender-sensitive legal and policy frameworks is critical to provide the legal basis for addressing TFGBV. States, technology companies including social media platforms, media and news organisations, and other stakeholders should recognise online violence from a gender lens, enact laws and policies that employ gender-balanced language, criminalise all forms of online violence and prioritise the digital safety of women and girls.

Evidence-Based Research for Gendered Actions

Evidence-based research is crucial for innovation and development of effective gendered actions to inform targeted interventions, policies, and programs that aim to combat online violence. Data that establishes the nature, prevalence, extent and the risk factors of TFGBV and the impact it poses should be collected and analysed by states alongside other stakeholders like CSOs. Such studies can be the foundational basis for identifying and addressing the root causes of the violence for more effective gendered actions against the vice.

Capacity Building and Awareness Raising

In line with the resolution, there is a need for capacity building and awareness raising in addressing TFGBV. Capacity building and awareness raising through various fora such as the media has the capacity to empower governments, individuals, communities, and institutions to understand, prevent, and respond to violence against women. Programmes such as digital literacy, advocacy interventions, community and network-led education, and capacitating law enforcement officers, the judiciary and other institutions will contribute to the wider goal of addressing online violence targeting women. Specific efforts in privacy awareness, online safety and digital hygiene will contribute to the creation of safer spaces for women who are disproportionately targeted by online violence.

Cooperation with Stakeholders including CSOs and Service Providers

The Resolution calls for cooperation of states with stakeholders including CSOs and service providers to end TFGBV. Collaboration amongst these players can help to combat TFGBV. CSOs can continually play the watchdog role of outreach and monitoring state efforts and activities. Service providers should engage in promoting responsibility over content and enhance accountability over the use of the online spaces and platforms. Similarly, there should be joint efforts to end violence against women such as through information sharing, capacity building, conducting joint campaigns and employing policy advocacy and tech solutions such as use of technology tools to track and investigate suspected cases of violence against women.

Protection and Support for Victims

The effects of violence in any form can be devastating. The devastating effects call for mitigation of the harm caused and empowering of survivors to heal and seek justice. States need to adopt comprehensive approaches which facilitate mitigation of harms including taking appropriate action for immediate support and providing safe spaces for survivors, safety planning and documentation of evidence. Similarly, clear mechanisms for reporting and redress including law enforcement and legal assistance for survivors can go a long way in victim support. Psychological and emotional support and providing self-care resources are also key. Additionally, digital security and privacy support, community support and advocacy such as awareness raising, provision of specialised services such as trauma-informed care and culturally sensitive services, and education including digital literacy programmes and public awareness aimed at enhancing preventive measures are important strategies for combating TFGBV. 

Buttressing Prevention Measures

The ACHPR/Res. 522 (LXXII) 2022 enlists a number of actions which African Union Member States should undertake. If undertaken, these actions could check on tech-enabled violence against women. They could also be the basis upon which equality in the enjoyment of fundamental rights and freedoms in the online space can be achieved. By strengthening prevention measures, a society that is pro-rights and freedoms that ensures a safe and inclusive space for empowering women and girls will be attained. Thus, individuals, groups, and communities through buttressed approaches will be equipped with knowledge, tools and skills to prevent, respond to and combat online violence.


Conclusively, the ACHPR/Res. 522 (LXXII) 2022 is a step forward in the fight against gender discrimination and women targeted violence in the online spaces. It sets a powerful benchmark for dealing with and addressing TFGBV. Its multi-faceted approach of bringing various stakeholders including governments, civil society, and the private sector together and, dealing with the issues in a comprehensive manner especially by states, provides a progressive roadmap for creating a safer and more inclusive online environment for women across Africa.

1 2 3 … 5