Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Tag Archives: Data Governance

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Data Governance
31Oct

Applications are Open for a New Round of Africa Digital Rights Funding!

Author CIPESA Posted on

Announcement |

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) is calling for proposals to support digital rights work across Africa.

This call for proposals is the 10th under the CIPESA-run Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF) initiative that provides rapid response and flexible grants to organisations and networks to implement activities that promote digital rights and digital democracy, including advocacy, litigation, research, policy analysis, skills development, and movement building.

 The current call is particularly interested in proposals for work related to:

  • Data governance including aspects of data localisation, cross-border data flows, biometric databases, and digital ID.
  • Digital resilience for human rights defenders, other activists and journalists.
  • Censorship and network disruptions.
  • Digital economy.
  • Digital inclusion, including aspects of accessibility for persons with disabilities.
  • Disinformation and related digital harms.
  • Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV).
  • Platform accountability and content moderation.
  • Implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
  • Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI).

Grant amounts available range between USD 5,000 and USD 25,000 per applicant, depending on the need and scope of the proposed intervention. Cost-sharing is strongly encouraged, and the grant period should not exceed eight months. Applications will be accepted until November 17, 2025. 

Since its launch in April 2019, the ADRF has provided initiatives across Africa with more than one million US Dollars and contributed to building capacity and traction for digital rights advocacy on the continent.  

Application Guidelines

Geographical Coverage

The ADRF is open to organisations/networks based or operational in Africa and with interventions covering any country on the continent.

Size of Grants

Grant size shall range from USD 5,000 to USD 25,000. Cost sharing is strongly encouraged.

Eligible Activities

The activities that are eligible for funding are those that protect and advance digital rights and digital democracy. These may include but are not limited to research, advocacy, engagement in policy processes, litigation, digital literacy and digital security skills building. 

Duration

The grant funding shall be for a period not exceeding eight months.

Eligibility Requirements

  • The Fund is open to organisations and coalitions working to advance digital rights and digital democracy in Africa. This includes but is not limited to human rights defenders, media, activists, think tanks, legal aid groups, and tech hubs. Entities working on women’s rights, or with youth, refugees, persons with disabilities, and other marginalised groups are strongly encouraged to apply.
  • The initiatives to be funded will preferably have formal registration in an African country, but in some circumstances, organisations and coalitions that do not have formal registration may be considered. Such organisations need to show evidence that they are operational in a particular African country or countries.
  • The activities to be funded must be in/on an African country or countries.

Ineligible Activities

  • The Fund shall not fund any activity that does not directly advance digital rights or digital democracy.
  • The Fund will not support travel to attend conferences or workshops, except in exceptional circumstances where such travel is directly linked to an activity that is eligible.
  • Costs that have already been incurred are ineligible.
  • The Fund shall not provide scholarships.
  • The Fund shall not support equipment or asset acquisition.

Administration

The Fund is administered by CIPESA. An internal and external panel of experts will make decisions on beneficiaries based on the following criteria:

  • If the proposed intervention fits within the Fund’s digital rights priorities.
  • The relevance to the given context/country.
  • Commitment and experience of the applicant in advancing digital rights and digital democracy.
  • Potential impact of the intervention on digital rights and digital democracy policies or practices.

The deadline for submissions is Monday, November 17, 2025. The application form can be accessed here.

24Oct

Why African Languages and Knowledge Systems Matter in Online Governance

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Juliet Nanfuka |

During a multistakeholder consultation held at the Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa (2025) that took place in Windhoek, Namibia, participants called attention to the urgent need to elevate African languages and indigenous knowledge systems within global internet governance. The consultation, hosted by UNESCO and the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) highlighted the urgent need for the digital ecosystem to be more representative and responsive to the realities of African users. The consultation which comprised experts from academia, artificial intelligence (AI) experts, civil society and the media took place on September 26, 2025. One of the strongest concerns raised related to the ways in which big tech companies classify African languages. It was noted that current language identification models are often inaccurate, frequently misclassifying African language datasets which has often resulted in weak or unusable models and contributed to content moderation systems that are inadequately built to address the information disorder in African digital spaces.

Opening the session, John Okande, Programme Coordinator at UNESCO highlighted the UN International Decade of Indigenous Languages (2022-2032) which provides a global mandate to protect and promote linguistic diversity. He noted that this initiative aligns with the principles of UNESCO’s Guidelines for the Governance of Digital Platforms and the UN Global Principles on Information Integrity, which both call for multi-stakeholder action to ensure technology serves all communities equitably. Okande emphasised that these global frameworks “require deliberate adaptation to Africa’s unique linguistic and cultural contexts.” Various initiatives by UNESCO to promote multilingualism in cyberspace demonstrate the value of localised interventions that safeguard freedom of expression while building community resilience including. Among these is the Social Media for 4 Peace (SM4P) global initiative aimed at building societies’ resilience to online harmful content, disinformation and hate speech, while safeguarding freedom of expression and fostering peace through social media.

The consultation also laid bare how AI and Large Language Models (LLMs) can amplify harm. LLMs sometimes provide harmful or dangerous responses due to the data they are trained on being low-quality or biased. In many cases, outsourced data trainers lack supervision, and limited regulatory frameworks to ensure ethical or safe training processes.

Many LLMs lack basic safety guardrails for African languages in comparison to English where harmful queries are often flagged and blocked. This disparity is illustrative of the persisting data inequalities in the AI ecosystem.

Tajuddeen Gwadabe, Programs and MEL Lead at Masakhane African Languages Hub noted that while languages like Hausa have tens of millions of speakers, only one dialect, often the standardised, formal variant is what gets represented online. Entire linguistic communities, such as speakers of the Sokoto dialect, are rendered invisible in digital datasets.

Participants shared similar concerns as they noted that the broader online representations of African languages tend to reflect how language is used when written, and not how languages are spoken. They noted that code-mixing, slang, tonal nuance, gestures, and layered cultural meaning are nearly impossible for AI to capture without intentional investment.

“Despite African languages having a large number of speakers, digital spaces often only represent one variant or standardised dialect. For instance, in Hausa, only the standard writing from Kano is represented, while dialects from Sokoto “are hardly ever present.”

The consultation highlighted concerns in African intellectual infrastructure which serves as the basis for knowledge creation and dissemination including the facilitation of downstream productive activities, including information production, innovation, development of products, education, community building and interaction, democratic participation, socialisation, and many other socially valuable activities.

Dr. Phathiswa Magopeni, Executive Director of the South Africa Press Council, noted the urgent need to build African intellectual infrastructure alongside efforts to elevate African languages in the digital society. She highlighted the dominance of the English language including in African policy and regulatory documents across many countries and argued that this serves to protect English, but at the cost of indigenous languages.

She noted, “We are often willing to compromise the essence of our own languages in the belief that doing so will grant us access to spaces dominated by English. Meanwhile, the speakers of English continue to protect their language.” Dr. Magopeni emphasised that many African languages lack foundational datasets across academic, scientific, legal, and technical fields that are essential for the long-term strengthening of African intellectual infrastructure.

The consultation went on to raise various dynamics about the state of the current ecosystem including on the extent to which African identity gets lost online as Africans adjust their identity to suit the limitations of digital platforms. Further, there was debate on the extent to which platforms should be compelled to adapt to African contexts with consensus reached on that fact that political will is necessary to advance African languages in digital spaces. It was noted that without policymakers prioritising local languages including in Parliament, service delivery and publicly accessible data, there will be limited improvement.

Digital Rights research and political analyst Dércio Tsandzana illustrated the case of Mozambique noting that in Parliament, some members of parliament do not effectively participate all through their mandate due to their inability to speak Portuguese which is the national language. “If we don’t have politicians or policy makers that want to change first in their countries we will not see any change (by platforms).” Tsandzana noted.

Ultimately gaps in African languages online will continue to remain a sore point for disinformation and continent moderation due to the deep-seated issues concerning data quality, the nature of language use, and the limitations of AI technology.

The consensus from the consultation was that there is a need for more collaboration between stakeholders and an ecosystem-wide approach in African AI development. It was noted that universities, particularly African language departments, hold extensive expertise on standardised linguistic forms. Meanwhile, stakeholders such as governments which hold immense amounts of public data, through to community institutions such as local radio stations reflect how languages are used today all have a role to play in contributing to how African languages are integrated in AI. Thus, big tech companies need to work more cohesively with a broader spectrum of stakeholders.

Further, there was agreement in the urgency of populating the internet with more African content including  stories, proverbs, folklore, and history. As AI continues to learn using whatever data is available, African content must be present and accurate. Thus there is a need to invest in indigenous language content development, strengthen African intellectual infrastructure, and to also demand accountability from global platforms. These efforts require the development of practical and context-specific action plans for policymakers and tech platforms to realise African indigenous language and knowledge systems in the digital ecosystem.

Digital Public Infrastructure in Africa: A Looming Crisis of Equitable Access, Digital Rights, and Sovereign Control
30Jul

Digital Public Infrastructure in Africa: A Looming Crisis of Equitable Access, Digital Rights, and Sovereign Control

Author CIPESA Posted on
Digital Public Infrastructure in Africa: A Looming Crisis of Equitable Access, Digital Rights, and Sovereign Control
CCTV system in Kampala, Uganda. REUTERS/James Akrena (2019)

By Brian Byaruhanga

In June 2025, Uganda suspended its Express Penalty Scheme (EPS) for traffic offences, less than a week after its launch, citing a “lack of clarity” among government agencies. While this seemed like a routine administrative misstep, it exposed a more significant issue: the brittle foundation upon which many digital public infrastructures (DPI) in Africa are being built. DPI refers to the foundational digital systems and platforms, such as digital identity, payments, and data exchange frameworks, which form the backbone of digital societies, similar to how roads or electricity function in the physical world. 

This EPS saga highlighted implementation gaps and illuminated a systemic failure to promote equitable access, public accountability, and safeguard fundamental rights in the rollout of DPI.

When the State Forgets the People

The Uganda EPS, established under section 166 of the Traffic and Road Safety Act, Cap 347, serves as a tech-driven improvement to road safety. Its  goal is to reduce road accidents and fatalities by encouraging better driver behaviour and compliance with traffic laws. By allowing offenders to pay fines directly without prosecution, the system aims to resolve minor offences quickly and to ease the burden on the judicial system. Challenges faced by the manual EPS system, which the move to the automated system aimed to eliminate, include corruption (reports of deleted fines, selective enforcement, and theft of collected penalties). 

At the heart of the EPS was an automated surveillance and enforcement system, which used Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras and license plate recognition to issue real-time traffic fines. This system operated with almost complete opacity. A Russian company, Joint Stock Company Global Security, was reportedly entitled to 80% of fine revenues, despite making minimal investment, among other significant legal and procurement irregularities. There was a notable absence of clear contracts, publicly accessible oversight mechanisms, or effective avenues for appeal. Equally concerning, the collection and storage of extensive amounts of sensitive data lacked transparency regarding who had access to it.

Such an arrangement represented a profound breach of public trust and an infringement upon digital rights, including data privacy and access to information. It illustrated the minimal accountability under which foreign-controlled infrastructure can operate within a nation. This was a data-driven governance mechanism that lacked the corresponding data rights safeguards, subjecting Ugandans to a system they could neither comprehend nor contest.

This is Not an Isolated Incident

The situation in Uganda reflects a widespread trend across the continent. In Kenya, the 2024 Microsoft–G42 data centre agreement – announced as a partnership with the government to build a state-of-the-art green facility aimed at advancing infrastructure, research and development, innovation, and skilling in Artificial Intelligence (AI) –  has raised serious concerns about data sovereignty and long-term control over critical digital infrastructure. 

In Uganda, the National Digital ID system (Ndaga Muntu) became a case study in how poorly-governed DPI deepens structural exclusion and undermines equitable  access to public services. A 2021 report by the Centre for Human Rights and Global Justice found that rigid registration requirements, technical failures, and a lack of recourse mechanisms denied millions of citizens access to healthcare, education, and social protection. Those most affected were the elderly, women, and rural communities. However, a 2025 High Court ruling ignored evidence and expert opinions about the ID system’s exclusion and implications for human rights. 

Studies estimate that most e-government projects in Africa end in partial or total failure, often due to poor project design, lack of infrastructure, weak accountability frameworks, and insufficient citizen engagement. Many of these projects are built on imported technologies and imposed models that do not reflect the realities or governance contexts of African societies.

The clear pattern is emerging across the continent: countries  are integrating complex, often foreign-managed or poorly localised digital systems into public governance without establishing strong, rights-respecting frameworks for transparency, accountability, and oversight. Instead of empowering citizens, this version of digital transformation risks deepening inequality, centralising control, and undermining public trust in government digital systems.

The State is Struggling to Keep Up

National Action Plans (NAPs) on Business and Human Rights, intended to guide ethical public–private collaboration, have failed to address the unique challenges posed by DPI. Uganda’s NAP barely touches on data governance, algorithmic harms, or surveillance technologies. While Kenya’s NAP mentions the digital economy, it lacks enforceable guardrails for foreign firms managing critical infrastructure. In their current form, these frameworks are insufficiently equipped to respond to the complexity and ethical risks embedded in modern DPI deployments.

Had the Ugandan EPS system been subject to stronger scrutiny under a digitally upgraded NAP, key questions would likely have been raised before implementation:

  • What redress exists for erroneous or abusive fines?
  • Who owns the data and where is it stored?
  • Are the financial terms fair, equitable, and sovereign?

But these questions came too late.

What these failures point to is not just a lack of policy, but a lack of operational mechanisms to design, test and interrogate DPI before roll out. What is needed is a practical bridge that responds to public needs and enforces human rights standards.

Regulatory Sandboxes: A Proactive Approach to DPI

DPI systems, such as Uganda’s EPS, should undergo rigorous testing before full-scale deployment. In such a space, a system’s logic, data flows, human rights implications, and resilience under stress are collectively scrutinised before any harm occurs. This is the purpose of regulatory sandboxes – platforms that offer a structured, participatory, and transparent testbed for innovations. 

Thus, a regulatory sandbox could have revealed and resolved core failures of Uganda’s EPS before rollout, including the controversial revenue-sharing arrangement with a foreign contractor.

How Regulatory Sandboxes Work: Regulatory sandboxes are useful for testing DPI systems and governance frameworks such as revenue models in a transparent manner, enabling stakeholders to examine the model’s fairness and legality. This entails publicly revealing financial terms to regulators, civil society, and the general public. Secondly, before implementation, simulated impact analyses can also highlight possible public backlash or a decline in trust. Sandboxes can be used for facilitating pre-implementation audits, making vendor selection and contract terms publicly available, and conducting mock procurements to detect errors.  By defining data ownership and access guidelines, creating redress channels for data abuse, and supporting inclusive policy reviews with civil society, regulatory sandboxes make data governance and accountability more clear.

This shift from reactive damage control to proactive governance is what regulatory sandboxes offer. If Uganda had employed a sandbox approach, the EPS system might have served as a model for ethical innovation rather than a cautionary tale of rushed deployment, weak oversight, and lost public trust.

Beyond specific systems like EPS or digital ID, the future of Africa’s digital transformation hinges on how digital public infrastructure is conceived, implemented, and governed. Foundational services, such as digital identity, health information platforms, financial services, surveillance mechanisms, and mobility solutions, are increasingly reliant on data and algorithmic decision-making. However, if these systems are designed and deployed without sufficient citizen participation, independent oversight, legal safeguards, and alignment with the public interest, they risk becoming tools of exclusion, exploitation, and foreign dependency. 

Realising the full potential of DPIs as a tool for inclusion, digital sovereignty, and rights-based development demands urgent and deliberate efforts to embed accountability, transparency, and digital rights at every stage of their lifecycle.

Photo Credit – CCTV system in Kampala, Uganda. REUTERS/James Akena (2019)

CIPESA @ IGF 2025
23Jun

Amplifying African Voices in Global Digital Governance

Author CIPESA Writer Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) will be participating at the 2025 Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Norway. The IGF serves as key  global multistakeholder platform that facilitates the discussion of public policy issues pertaining to the Internet. This year, the Forum takes place from June 23-27, 2025 in Lillestrom, Norway under the overarching theme of Building Our Multistakeholder Digital Future.

CIPESA will contribute expertise across multiple sessions that examine digital rights in the Global South. These include discussions on repressive cyber laws and their impact on civic space, inclusive and harmonised data governance frameworks for Africa, and the barriers to participation in global technical standards development. CIPESA will also join sessions highlighting cross-regional cooperation on data governance, digital inclusion of marginalised groups, and the need for multilingual accessibility in global digital processes. CIPESA will also support a booth (number #57) hosted by the Civil Society Alliances for Digital Empowerment (CADE)  of which it is a member. The booth will showcase activities and resources, including the winners of the AI Artivism for Digital Rights Competition, the Youth Voices for Digital Rights programme, and much more. Through these engagements, CIPESA enhance and amplify African perspectives on platform accountability, digital justice, and rights-based approaches to internet governance.The insights gathered and shared at the IGF will also inform the upcoming 2025 edition of the Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa (FIFAfrica25) – an event convened annually by CIPESA. The Forum, now in its 12th year ranks as Africa’s leading platform for shaping digital rights, inclusion, and governance conversations. This year, the Forum will be hosted in  Windhoek, Namibia and will take place on September 24–26, 2025.

Here is where to find CIPESA @ IGF2025 ..

Monday, June 23 | 16:00-17:00 (CEST) – Workshop Room 3

Day 0 Event #257:  Enhancing Data Governance in the Public Sector  

This session will examine the state of data governance in the public sector of developing countries, emphasizing the importance of inclusive, multi-stakeholder engagement. It highlights how current frameworks often centre government institutions while neglecting interoperability, collaboration, and broader policy cohesion. Using global case studies—particularly from Papua New Guinea—it will spotlight challenges and propose innovations like centralized oversight bodies, interoperable platforms, and adaptive governance. Best practices such as real-time analytics, data partnerships, and capacity building will be explored to support scalable and context-specific governance solutions.

Tuesday, June 24 |  14:45–15:45 (CEST) – Workshop Room 4

Open Forum #56: Shaping Africa’s Digital Future: Multi-Stakeholder Panel on Data Governance

As Africa advances its digital transformation, harmonized data governance is critical to unlocking the continent’s potential for inclusive growth and digital trade. Fragmented national policies and inconsistent cross-border data frameworks create barriers to innovation, privacy, and cybersecurity. This session will convene stakeholders from government, industry, and civil society to explore strategies for regulatory alignment, trusted data flows, and climate-resilient governance models. Aligned with the AU Data Policy Framework, it will highlight best practices to build a unified, rights-respecting digital economy in Africa.

Tuesday, June 24 | 13:30-15:30 (CEST) –  Room  Studio N

Parliamentary session 4: From dialogue to action: Advancing digital cooperation across regions and stakeholder groups

Host: UN, Stortinget (Norwegian Parliament) and Inter Parliamentary UnionInternet (IPU)

Building on the outputs of the 2024 IGF Parliamentary Track and the discussions held so far in 2025, this multi-stakeholder consultation will bring together MPs and key digital players to reflect on how to operationalize concrete, inclusive and collaborative policymaking efforts. All groups will be invited to propose cooperative approaches to building digital governance and identify practical steps for sustaining cooperation beyond the IGF.

Wednesday, June 25 | 17:30 -19:00(CEST) – Workshop room 4, NOVA Spektrum 

Side event: Aspirations for the India AI Impact Summit

Hosts: CIPESA, Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University Delhi (CCG), United Nations Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies (UN ODET).

This closed-door dialogue aims to spark early conversations toward an inclusive and representative Global AI Impact Summit, focusing on the participation of Global Majority experts. It will explore meaningful engagement in Summit working groups, side events, and knowledge sharing, especially building on insights from the Paris Summit. The session is part of a broader effort to host multiple convenings that strengthen diverse stakeholder participation in global AI governance. By addressing foundational questions now, the dialogue seeks to shape intentional, impactful, and inclusive discussions at the upcoming Summit.

Wednesday June 25 | 09:00-09:45 (CEST) – Workshop Room 4

Networking Session #93: Cyber Laws and Civic Space – Global South–North Advocacy Strategies

Host: CADE

Many governments are enacting cyber laws to address online crime, but these often contain vague provisions that enable repression of journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens. In practice, such laws have facilitated mass surveillance, curtailed privacy, and been weaponised to stifle dissent, particularly under authoritarian regimes. This session brings together Global North and Global South civil society actors to exchange experiences, resources, and strategies for resisting repressive cyber legislation. It will focus on how collaborative advocacy can support legal reform and safeguard digital rights through shared tools, solidarity, and policy influence.

Wednesday, June 25 | 14:15–15:30 (CEST) – Workshop Room 4

Open Forum #7: Advancing Data Governance Together – Across Regions

Hosts: CIPESA, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, The Republic of The Gambia

As cross-border data flows grow rapidly, effective data governance is essential for fostering trust, security, and inclusive digital development. However, fragmented national regulations and inconsistent privacy and cybersecurity standards pose challenges to regional and global cooperation. This session brings together stakeholders from Africa, the Eastern Partnership, and the Western Balkans to explore harmonized, interoperable governance models that support responsible data sharing and economic growth. Through collaborative dialogue, the session will identify strategies for aligning data governance with digital rights, innovation, and sustainable development across diverse regional contexts.

Thursday, June 26 | 12:30–13:00 (CEST) – Open Stage

Lightning Talk #90: Tower of Babel Chaos – Tackling the Challenges of Multilingualism for Inclusive Communication

Host: CADE

This interactive session, led by members of the Civil Alliances for Digital Empowerment (CADE), highlights the communication challenges faced in global digital forums due to linguistic, gender, and geographic diversity. Using a flash-mob-style simulation, participants will experience firsthand the difficulties of multistakeholder dialogue when multiple native languages intersect without common understanding. The session underscores that language is often the most significant barrier to meaningful inclusion in global digital governance. It aims to provoke thought on the urgent need for more multilingual and accessible participation in international digital policy spaces.

Thursday, June 26 | 16:00-17:00 (CEST) – Workshop Room 6

WS #214: AI Readiness in Africa in a Shifting Geopolitical Landscape

Host: German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), supported by GIZ

AI has vast potential, but without proper governance, it risks deepening inequality and reinforcing Africa’s dependency on global tech powers. Despite growing local engagement, Africa remains underrepresented in global AI development due to limited investment, regulatory gaps, and the dominance of multinational firms, raising concerns about digital exploitation. This session will bring together diverse voices to explore how Africa can build inclusive, locally rooted AI ecosystems that protect rights and serve regional needs.

Friday, June 27 | 09:00–10:00 (CEST) – Workshop Room 2

Open Forum #34: How Technical Standards Shape Connectivity and Inclusion

Host: Freedom Online Coalition

Technical standards are essential to enabling global connectivity, interoperability, and inclusive digital access, but their development often excludes voices from the Global Majority and marginalized communities. This session will examine how open and interoperable standards can bridge the digital divide, focusing on infrastructure such as undersea cables, network protocols, and security frameworks. It will explore barriers to inclusive participation in standard-setting bodies like the ITU, IETF, IEEE, and W3C, and identify strategies for transparency and multistakeholder engagement. By promoting equitable, rights-respecting technical governance, the session aims to support digital inclusion and advance sustainable development goals.

Friday, June 27 | 11:45–12:30 (CEST) – Workshop Room 6

Networking Session #74: Mapping Digital Rights Capacities and Threats

Host: Oxfam

This session will present findings from multi-country research on digital rights capacities and threats, with a focus on historically marginalised groups in the Global South. It will showcase innovative strategies and tools used to build digital literacy and awareness, using poster presentations from Bolivia, Cambodia, Palestine, Somalia, and Vietnam. Participants will engage in a moderated discussion to share practical approaches and collaborate on building a more inclusive, rights-based digital ecosystem. The session will also contribute to a shared online repository of tools, fostering international cooperation and capacity-building through the ReCIPE program led by Oxfam.

Friday, June 27 | 11:45–12:30 (CEST) – Workshop Room 5

Networking Session #200 – Cross-Regional Connections for Information Resilience 

Host: Proboxve

This networking session brings together participants from diverse regions to connect, share experiences, and develop collaborative strategies for safeguarding information integrity in electoral processes while upholding internet freedoms. The session will address critical challenges such as disinformation, censorship, foreign interference, platform manipulation, and civic education, emphasizing the importance of protecting digital rights, especially during elections.

04Nov

Key Takeaways From the 2022 African Union Data Policy Framework

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

The Africa Union Data Policy Framework published in July 2022 is one of the most significant documents on data governance on the continent. The Policy Framework is an extensive blueprint to guide African countries’ efforts to establish effective data governance regimes to leverage the data and digital revolution the continent is currently experiencing.

The Policy Framework draws from 30 years worth of experience in attempts to harmonise official statistics in Africa. Compared to the previous initiatives by the African Union (AU), the Policy Framework interrogates the key contextual and capacity challenges inherent in most African countries. It also demonstrates that, in spite of some hiccups, countries can still come up with reasonable and enforceable digital data governance policies and legislative frameworks.

Indeed, as a brief by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) shows, the Policy Framework is beneficial  to data governance, data rights and privacy in Africa. However, its implementation is likely to come up against notable challenges.

The Policy Framework seeks to become a major reference point and blueprint for governments in Africa on data protection legislation, cross-border sharing of critical data and information to facilitate trade and development. Further, it seeks to calibrate the normally complicated balancing act between enforcing data protection and promoting privacy on one hand, while not curtailing data rights, access to information, open data and open government, and promoting cross-border sharing of data without limitations of sovereignty and protectionism by Member States.

It also emphasises the importance of data interoperability and recommends harmonised national data systems that aggregate different and disparate data systems into singular ones accessible to all parties.

However, the brief notes that the implementation plan of the Policy Framework will need actionable and practical guidelines that countries can follow in ensuring that interests in national security, public order and national economic sovereignty do not unnecessarily stand in the way of the immense benefits of data privacy, open data sharing, intercountry digital collaboration on trade and commerce, and the power of harmonisation of data systems.

Benefits the Data Policy Framework Can Deliver to Data Governance and Data Rights in Africa

    • The Policy Framework provides a key reference resource for governments that are currently designing or reviewing their data governance policy and legal instruments. It is well researched and was collaboratively developed by key institutions of the AU and associate organisations.
    • Countries that will draw from the Policy Framework into their data policy making will receive enormous goodwill from Member States on collaboration and cross-border data sharing efforts, goodwill that emanates from the authority and goodwill that the African Union enjoys among Member States.
    • The Policy Framework acknowledges the unique and complex contexts of each country. It is not prescriptive, as it gives countries wiggle room to preserve their national and sovereign interests while designing policies that are in tune with continental best practice that the Policy Framework offers.
    • Private institutions, civil society and development partners will also find the Policy Framework to be an important resource to guide efforts to collaborate and harmonise their strategies on supporting data and digital ecosystems in Africa, without unnecessary duplication.  
    • The Policy Framework has potential to provide the all-important middle between data rights and privacy while not compromising easy access to key development data and information. Advocates in these arenas will find the Policy Framework an important guiding tool for their data advocacy strategies.

According to the CIPESA brief, the challenges which implementation of the Policy Framework is likely to face include limited financing both at country and at AU levels. Others are the inherent integration problems within the continent, such as the culture of secrecy among African nations, inward-looking and sovereignty concerns that have already delayed AU initiatives like the continental passport and visa-free travel, and the challenges Regional Economic Communities (RECs) still face in realising free movement of goods and people, common markets and political federation.

Further, the brief notes that many AU Member States have challenges with political democracy, with some routinely shutting down the internet during elections and others weaponising technology use, with cybercrime and surveillance laws being used to crack down on critics and political opponents. “Such nations might find some of the progressive pronouncements and recommendations of the Policy Framework a bit too much of an ask,” notes the brief, arguing that this complex political economy of individual African states could be the biggest challenge for implementing the Policy Framework at country level.

In this brief, CIPESA highlights five key takeaways from the 2022 African Union Data Policy Framework.