Rollout of Digital Number Plates Poses Privacy Concerns in Uganda

By CIPESA Writer |

The rollout of the digital number plate system in Uganda is well underway. At a press conference last month, the Ministry of Works and Transport announced January 2025 as the deadline for full roll out. The system – over two years in the making – is a joint project between the government of Uganda and Russian company Joint Stock Company Global Security and has caused alarm among rights activists as it introduces another layer of massive personal data collection and processing amidst weak controls.

The stated objective of the Intelligent Transport Monitoring System (ITMS) is to improve the country’s transport management systems and security by enabling the authorities to “swiftly identify vehicles involved in criminal activities and improve traffic management through efficient ticketing and revenue collection”. It will involve the installation of digital number plates on all vehicles and motorcycles in the country, allowing security agencies to track and pinpoint their location at any one time.

  Overview of ITMS
Digital Number Plate ComponentsStatus of Fitment on Government Vehicles as at June 2024Target Installations (Registered Vehicles as at July 2024)
Aluminium plates – front and back1,0912,145, 988
A tracker
A sim chip
Bluetooth beacons – front and back
Snap locks

Once rolled out, the digital plates will add to the catalogue of surveillance apparatus in Uganda. The country already has a plethora of retrogressive laws, such as the Regulation of Interception of Communications Act 2010 and the Anti-Terrorism Act 2002 that require communication service providers to aid in intercepting communication by ensuring that their systems are always technically capable of supporting lawful interception. The laws also grant powers to an authorised officer to intercept the communications of a person and to conduct surveillance of individuals.

The components of the digital number plates will enable the government through its security agencies, such as the police, to swiftly identify vehicles and their owners. Instantaneous data exchanges pose major challenges to data privacy, especially in cases where there are calculated targets such as civil society organisations (CSOs), human rights defenders (HRDs), activists, and political opponents, government critics, or dissidents.

An added concern is that, according to the Uganda Police, the digital number plate system will be integrated with the Closed Circuit Television System (CCTV) system and others such as the motor vehicle registration system, the e-tax system managed by the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) and the national identity database managed by the National Identification and Registration Authority (NIRA) to “ensure comprehensive vehicle and personal identification.” Given weak controls over data held by public bodies and rare punishment for data breaches and unauthorised access, linking these databases absent clear data-sharing frameworks and robust controls poses grave concerns. Notably, Uganda does not have a law or regulations governing CCTV/ video surveillance.

Whereas there are efforts to localise parts of the system through the establishment of a local production facility for the various components, the partnership with Joint Stock Company Global Security underscores Uganda’s reliance on foreign entities for purposes of conducting surveillance and interception of private communication of its citizens. For example, in August 2022, there were reports that the Uganda Police had purchased UFED, a technology developed by the Israeli firm Cellebrite that enables authorities to hack into password-protected smartphones.

Earlier, starting in 2018, Uganda turned to a Chinese company, Huawei, for the supply and installation of CCTV across major cities. The decision to install the CCTV cameras came on the heels of a spate of murders that had engulfed the country, with the security forces keen on using the CCTV cameras to improve security in the country. Like many other government security procurements, the CCTV deal raised a lot of transparency and accountability issues, including the secrecy that surrounded the entire process.

Additionally, there were reports that security agencies were working with Huawei technicians in Uganda to spy on opposition critics by intercepting encrypted communications and using cell data to track their movements. This appeared to be the continuation of a trend that was documented earlier in 2012, when the Uganda government reportedly relied on a Germany-made spyware, FinFisher, which it is said to have covertly installed in various places, including hotels, the parliament and key government institutions, for purposes of surveilling on its opponents, including politicians, civil society, and the media.

Given the country’s history of repressing the civic space and harassing political opponents, CSOs and HRDs, the ITMS digital number plates could further the suppression of civil liberties, including political participation, freedom of expression, access to information and assembly and association. Moreover, deeper democratic regression could occur since these liberties largely depend on privacy and the ability to express oneself with minimal interruptions or interference.

While the government has a legitimate desire to improve the security of its people and transport management, recent events as discussed above where the same government has used the acquired technologies to surveil its citizens and undermine digital rights, it is critical that any future attempt to enhance its surveillance apparatus is anchored in law with clear oversight mechanisms. This is because the deployment of surveillance technologies such as ITMS, FinFisher, and Huawei’s CCTV present a veritable avenue for economic and political exploitation by collecting extensive data on people’s behaviour, location, activities, and interests online and offline. This makes the risk of violation of privacy apparent, rendering citizens helpless because they essentially have no control over how the data will be used, even when they are aware that data is being collected.

It is, therefore, important that the government reduce its reliance on foreign-manufactured surveillance technologies, particularly from countries whose human rights record is wanting, as these have tended to use these tools to suppress civic spaces. In addition, the government should reconsider its regulatory framework to ensure it conforms to international standards on privacy and data protection, especially during the procurement and deployment of potentially intrusive technology that is prone to abuse.

Portal on Gender-Based Violence in Africa Expanded with ADRF Support

Update |

The Covid-19 pandemic was characterised by a sharp increase in gender-based violence (GBV) in Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa, as well as other countries across the world. This was largely attributed to lockdown restrictions, which left victims isolated in the same physical space as their abusers, reduced availability of shelters and other support mechanisms, and exacerbated economic anxiety and mental health pressures – all key drivers of GBV.

The pandemic also accelerated digitalisation, which widened the scope of Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV). According to UN Women, in Africa, online abuse, harassment and exploitation increased as learning went online during the pandemic. Similar  concerns about online harms are discussed in the African Union Guidelines on Gender-Responsive Responses to COVID-19.

Alt Advisory, a South Africa based public interest advisory firm, launched the endgbv.africa as a resource on domestic and international responses to GBV online and offline before, during and after the pandemic. At the time of its launch in 2022, the portal featured GBV mapping and assessments on the legal and policy developments, trends and statistics as well as key terminologies on six African countries – Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

With a grant from the Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF) – an initiative of the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) –  Alt Advisory has revamped and expanded the portal to cover an additional seven countries – Eswatini, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Mauritius, Nigeria and Uganda. The project has also featured a spotlight series on experiences of sexual minorities in Botswana and Uganda.

The new seven country factsheets were developed in collaboration with researchers from various fields, with multidisciplinary perspectives regarding GBV, thereby expanding the breadth of information relating to organisations and movements hitherto unknown due to varied degrees of online visibility. This collaborative approach has strengthened the regional network of gender rights advocates beyond national borders.

“Our hope is that the project’s focus on TFGBV enabled researchers to develop their own insights on emergent forms of harm which may potentially enrich future policy advocacy in their contexts,” said S’lindile Khumalo, a Senior Associate at Alt Advisory.

Alt Advisory’s Equity and Inclusion as well as Media teams are working to publicise the portal to maximise uptake and impact. The firm will also continue to fundraise to expand the portal’s coverage to the full African continent and translate the resources to increase relevance and accessibility to a diversity of audiences. All this, in tandem with efforts in law and policy reform, advocacy, and activism on GBV and related issues. “As the portal undergoes further development, we hope that it contributes to the end of GBV in our lifetime,” concluded Khumalo.

CIPESA Partners with AfricTivistes for the Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa 2024 (FIFAfrica24)

Announcement |

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) is pleased to announce a partnership with the Dakar-based AfricTivistes for the upcoming Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa 2024 (FIFAfrica24) set to take place on September 25-27, 2024 in Senegal. This partnership marks a significant milestone in ongoing efforts to advance digital democracy by both entities.

Established in 2015, AfricTivistes – the African League of Cyber-Activists and Bloggers for Democracy is a pan-African organisation that promotes and defends democracy, good governance and human rights through digital means. Across its programs, AfricTivistes works to foster digital transformation and enhanced citizenship in Africa led by change actors.

Indeed, AfricTivistes’ mission resonates with the goals of CIPESA and, ultimately, FIFAfrica, thus marking the foundation for an inclusive, informative, and responsive conference. Through its extensive network of actors, AfricTvistes brings to the Forum regional expertise and an in-depth understanding of advocacy and engagement for civic, social and political transformation.

“This partnership with CIPESA to organise a successful FIFAfrica is essential, as it will enable highlighting the state of participatory democracy in this region of Africa where it faces numerous challenges, and ultimately advance digital democracy by all stakeholders.”, noted Cheikh Fall, President of AfricTivistes.

The CIPESA-AfricTivistes partnership follows in FIFAfrica’s track record of galvanising multi-stakeholder efforts for shared strategies for advancing rights, participation and innovation online. Co-hosts of previous editions have included the Tanzania Ministry of Information, Communication and Information Technology (2023), the Zambia Ministry of Technology and Science (2022), Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Slovenia, Presidency of the Council of European Union (EU) 2021 (2021) and Paradigm Initiative (2020). The 2019, 2018 and 2017 editions of FIFAfrica were co-hosted with the Ethiopia Ministry of Innovation and Technology (MINT), Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) and the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), respectively.

This year, FIFAfrica24 – the first edition to be hosted in Francophone Africa – will serve as a key channel that feeds into the way ahead for digital rights in Africa and the role that different stakeholders need to play to realise the Digital Transformation Strategy for Africa and Declaration 15 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Declaration notes that the spread of information and communications technology and global interconnectedness has great potential to accelerate human progress, to bridge the digital divide and to develop knowledge societies.

FIFAfrica24 objectives:

  1. Enhance Networking and Collaboration:  the Forum provides a platform that assembles African thought leaders and networks working on internet freedom from diverse stakeholder groups.
  2. Promote Access To Information: Since inception, FIFAfrica has commemorated September 28, the International Day for Universal Access to Information (IDUAI), creating awareness about access to information offline and online and its connection to wider freedoms and democratic participation.
  3. Practical Skills and Knowledge Development: The Forum features pre-event practical training workshops for various stakeholders on a range of internet freedom issues, including technical aspects of internet access, policy developments, digital resilience, and advocacy strategies.
  4. Showcase Advocacy Efforts: FIFAfrica provides a space for entities advancing digital rights to showcase their work through artistic installations, photography, reports, interactive platforms and physical stalls with organisational representatives.
  5. Connect Research to Policy Discussions: The annualState of Internet Freedom in Africa report, a themed report produced by CIPESA, has been launched at FIFAfrica since 2014. The report has served to inform policy and advocacy efforts around the continent.
  6. Strategic Networks: FIFAfrica has served as a platform for strategic meetings to be held, offering various African and global networks the opportunity to directly engage with each other and with the extended digital rights community.

We encourage all stakeholders, including policymakers, civil society organisations, technology experts, academics, and members of the media, to join us in Dakar, Senegal, for FIFAfrica24 in person or remotely. Registration is required and can be completed here.

For more information and updates, please visit www.internetfreedom.africa and stay tuned for announcements regarding the event including agenda and speaker line-ups.

Together with AfricTivistes, we are committed to fostering an environment where digital rights are upheld, and internet freedom is a reality for all Africans.

For further information contact [email protected].

Is Foreign Malign Influence Inspiring Digital Authoritarianism in Uganda?

By CIPESA Writer |

A new policy brief by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) on the deteriorating state of digital rights in Uganda examines whether the east African country is drawing inspiration from China for its brand of digital authoritarianism.

Uganda is ranked as “Partly Free” by Freedom House’s annual Freedom on the Net report, with the biggest contributing factor being the repressive laws governing the digital civic space and surveillance, particularly those that enable internet censorship, network disruptions, and deployment of surveillance technologies such as spyware and video surveillance.

China has been a notable source of support in developing Uganda’s digital communication and other infrastructure. For example, Chinese telecom firm Huawei helped set up a video surveillance system for the Uganda Police, and reportedly aided security agencies to spy on political opponents in the country. China has also organised numerous study tours for Ugandan officials and journalists that are centred on popularising its economic and governance systems.

The brief illuminates how China and its model of governance and state surveillance may be influencing or inspiring retrogressive laws and undermining digital rights in Uganda. It explores the legal reforms necessary to advance digital rights in Uganda and the role that legislators, civil society organisations, human rights defenders (HRDs), and journalists should play.

Uganda has mirrored some practices from China, a country which various global indices consider a leading player in digital authoritarianism. While it is not patently clear whether China has directly influenced legislation in Uganda, the brief notes that “it has arguably inspired some of the legal frameworks and practices that fuel digital authoritarianism in the east African country.”

There is ample evidence indicating that African autocracies are exploiting the adoption of Chinese technology and model of internet controls to roll back democratic gains through surveillance and censorship.

China invested more than USD 110 million in Uganda’s National Backbone Data Transmission Project and also supported the National Fibre-Optic Project. There are suggestions that the national backbone and fibre-optic projects are part of a digital infrastructure that has enhanced the Uganda government’s surveillance capabilities that violate the right to privacy and freedom of expression.

China has continually buttressed its influence over Uganda’s social-economic development through the seemingly no-strings-attached loan schemes that have often been acknowledged and praised by President Museveni. This non-interference policy in the internal affairs of other countries allows their governments greater leeway to suppress dissent and democratic processes without facing criticism or repercussions from China.

By contrast, the Uganda government or senior public officials have during 2023 and 2024 attracted sanctions by the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and the World Bank over governance and human rights concerns. As such, the Chinese no-governance-strings-attached model is criticised for emboldening authoritarian tendencies in the countries it partners with.

However, the brief states that claims of China actively seeking to export its governance model and influencing local laws and practices in Africa are often anecdotal and inconclusive. Moreover, such claims and, often, the evidence they advance, assume that African governments are incapable of developing home-grown systems of governance and thoughtlessly rely on models from other continents.

Recommendations

Uganda should resist all foreign influence and models that promote digital authoritarianism and undermine democracy. The country’s laws must respect internationally recognised human rights standards and promote the use of a free, open, and safe internet.

The brief makes several recommendations, such as:

  • Parliament should strengthen legal and regulatory frameworks by amending or repealing regressive and oppressive frameworks to ensure responsible and ethical use of surveillance technology.
  • Parliament should enact laws that specifically protect journalists, whistle-blowers, human rights defenders, and activists from wanton threats, arrests, and prosecutions over legitimate online communications and activism that advances social accountability, respect for human rights, and good governance.
  • Civil society should conduct evidence-based research into the actions of foreign actors and how they adversely impact local laws, policies, and democratic governance.
  • Various stakeholders, including academia, the media, and lawyers, should engage in public interest litigation to challenge provisions in legislation that limit the exercise of digital rights.

See the full policy brief here.

South Africa’s Elections: A Call for Vigilance Amidst the Rising Tide of Disinformation

By Victor Kapiyo |

South Africa is holding its seventh general election today, May 29, 2024. Over 14,000 candidates are vying for seats as part of the 400 members of the National Assembly and at least 445 members of Provincial Legislatures in the nine provinces.

Ahead of the election, misinformation, disinformation and threats to privacy rights have been noted. These capitalise on the issues at stake in the election, such as poverty and economic inequality, unemployment, violent crime, corruption, service delivery failures, difficult race relations, and xenophobia to polarise and shape public opinion. There has been a proliferation of propaganda and doctored news stories, deployment of coordinated trolls, troops and bots of online influencers as part of smear campaigns, and weaponisation of disinformation campaigns for political purposes, which many warn could undermine the integrity of the elections.

A new Policy Brief by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy (CIPESA) reviews how different actors, including political parties, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), and social media platforms have leveraged technology to promote a peaceful and credible election. However, the brief also notes that as the internet, social media and technology adoption increase, attacks on information and election integrity could intensify if multi-actor action does not continue to be taken.

The election pits the ruling African National Congress (ANC) against its main rivals, the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), even as newer parties such as uMkhonto weSizwe join the fray. The country of 60.7 million people has 27.6 million registered voters, of whom 44.7% are men and 55.2% are women.

South Africa has been renowned for its strong and independent judiciary, free press, vibrant democracy, and generally free and fair elections over the years. However, rankings in press freedom have declined due to increased attacks against journalists, especially by politicians, ahead of the elections.

As of 2024, the country had 45.3 million internet users, representing an internet penetration rate of 74%, and 118.6 million mobile connections, equivalent to a mobile penetration rate of 195%. Also, most people in the country are digitally literate, with the average internet user spending over nine hours a day online. Political parties have leveraged online platforms for political advertising and have since January 2024 spent ZAR 4.94 million (USD 269,961) on Google Ads, with the DA and Freedom Front Plus spending 79.8% of this amount. These developments mean that technology and the internet will play an important role in the election period.

Yet disinformation has taken centre-stage in the election. Some of the misleading information has targeted prominent personalities such as politicians and musicians, highlighted racial and xenophobic undertones or misled the public about the elections. For example, a ‘deepfake’ video published on TikTok and X in March 2024, depicted former United States (US) president Donald Trump endorsing the new uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party. It was debunked by AFP, which found that the clip was an altered 2017 NBC interview with Trump.

On January 19, a viral video from Brazil of two men assaulting another man was disseminated on social media with the claim that the victim was a white farmer and his assailants were linked to the EFF. Another video that went viral on Facebook and WhatsApp in April made a false claim that Mozambican migrants were being issued with ID cards by state agents to vote in Gauteng province. Another post on May 25 on Facebook, claimed that voters must bring their black ballpoint pens to voting stations as they will only be given pencils to vote, and their marks would be erased upon voting. The IEC rejected this claim as untrue.

In addition, there have been attempts to impersonate key election officials on social media, and concerns around voters’’ privacy and data breaches. For example, in January, it was reported that the IEC Chairperson, Mosotho Moepya had been a victim of an imposter on WhatsApp. The imposter had on two separate incidents conversed with unsuspecting officials of political parties purporting to arrange to influence the election.

Ahead of the elections, various stakeholders and groups have been taking action to address the potential threats to election and information integrity. There are commendable efforts such as the adoption of the Principles and Guidelines for the Use of Digital and Social Media in Elections in Africa; the signing of the election code of conduct by political parties and candidates; and the use of digital platforms by the IEC to share information on election results, political party statistics, voter registration, voter information, voter education, and e-learning. South Africa’s Information Regulator also published a guidance note on how political parties and candidates could use the personal information of voters ahead of the elections.

There are also laudable efforts such as the Real411 portal to track misinformation and disinformation; enhanced efforts to act-check by Africa Check and AFP; and measures by platforms such as Google, Meta, and TikTok to promote election integrity, including working with fact-checkers, conducting content moderation and labelling, media information literacy, transparency on political advertising and directing users to reliable and trustworthy information.

From the foregoing, it is clear that the fault lines that have fragmented the unity of the Rainbow Nation are being manipulated in ways that threaten its democracy. Various stakeholders must continue to make concerted efforts to promote a healthy information ecosystem and to defend electoral integrity. Therefore, we make the following recommendations:

We call upon all stakeholders including civil society, the IEC, social media platforms, media, fact-checking organisations, political actors, election observers, and law enforcement to be vigilant before, during and after the elections.

We call upon stakeholders to collaborate in monitoring digital threats to election and information integrity and implement robust responses to combat them whilst protecting digital rights.

We call upon civil society and election observers to document the actions of and hold the government, IEC, social media platforms and other actors accountable for their responses.

We call upon the IEC, political parties, candidates and social media platforms to adhere to the Principles and Guidelines for the Use of Digital and Social Media in Elections in Africa.

Read the full Brief here.