Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Tag Archives: Freedom of expression

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Freedom of expression
19Jan

CIPESA Condemns Ongoing Internet Disruption in Uganda

Author CIPESA Posted on

Statement |

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) condemns the ongoing internet disruptions in Uganda and urges the government to immediately restore full access to social media platforms, blocked websites, and mobile money services. We further call upon the Government of Uganda to cease and desist from ordering internet throttling and blockages, which unjustifiably deny citizens the right to express themselves and to access, share and disseminate information. Internet disruptions further limit the public’s ability to conduct business, access public services, participate in community and civic affairs, socialise, and maintain contact with friends, family, and associates.

CIPESA joins numerous independent observers who have strongly condemned the disruptions to digital communications, including the Uganda Law Society, which has described the disruptions as unlawful. While the Uganda Communications Act (2013) grants powers to the national communications regulator, according to the Uganda Law Society, the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) may order a blockage of communications following a formal declaration of a state of emergency. No such state of emergency was declared at the time the regulator ordered a nationwide shutdown two days before the January 15, 2026, polls. Government officials said the disruption was aimed at curbing the spread of online misinformation, electoral fraud, and incitement to violence in the lead-up to the elections.

As affirmed by the African Commission’s Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, as well as global civil society organisations, governments must refrain from imposing network disruptions and instead address security or public order concerns through lawful, necessary, and proportionate measures. Indeed, internet shutdowns and restrictions are a disproportionate measure that violate Uganda’s constitutional guarantees and its regional and international human rights obligations, including those under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Furthermore, CIPESA is concerned by the broader pattern of repression, including relentless attacks on civil society organisations. In the days preceding the elections, several organisations working on media rights, democratic governance, and human rights protection were suspended, in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to silence independent voices. This broader crackdown on civic space also included the arrest of human rights defender Sarah Bireete, Executive Director of the Centre for Constitutional Governance, further illustrating the shrinking environment for civil society and human rights work in the country.

A free, independent, and vibrant civil society is indispensable to any democratic society and should not be treated as government adversaries. The Government of Uganda should therefore recognise civil society organisations as legitimate and valuable partners in improving livelihoods, strengthening rights protection, and advancing democratic governance and socio-economic transformation.

Similarly, CIPESA urges the government to immediately cease attacks against journalists and media workers, particularly those from independent media houses and journalists who are critical of government actions. These violations, which have been widely documented by national and international actors, including the United Nations, undermine media freedom and the public’s right to access information, especially during electoral periods.

19Jan

Navigating The Aftermath of Uganda’s Internet Shutdown

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Juliet Nanfuka |

After nearly five days without public internet access, connectivity in Uganda has been partially restored. On January 13, 2026, the government ordered internet service providers to block public access to the internet, with partial access being reinstated late at night on January 17, 2026. Social media and messaging platforms remain restricted as of January 19, 2026. Officials said the move was aimed at curbing the spread of online misinformation, electoral fraud, and incitement to violence in the lead-up to the polls. The order also halted the sale and registration of new SIM cards and blocked outbound data roaming services to One Network Area countries. Some essential services including healthcare systems at national referral hospitals, financial services including core banking and interbank systems, immigration and electoral commission secure portals, utilities management, and aviation and railway control systems were to remain accessible according to the directive. Thus, the country went to the polls in the midst of a “digital darkness”. The controversial election has seen Yoweri Museveni extend his 40 year rule by another five years following the announcement of his win.

Various human rights groups and election monitoring groups, including the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights,  African Freedom of Expression Exchange (AFEX), Access Now, Human Rights Watch and the UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner documented the shutdown and challenged the government’s position on blocking access to the internet. They argue that access to information and freedom of expression are especially critical during elections and that the blanket shutdown undermined election transparency and accountability.

While the restoration of internet access brings an end to the total blackout, it leaves behind pressing questions about the cost of restricting access to the internet during democratic processes and what such measures mean for civic participation, transparency, and accountability in Uganda.

The evolution of internet shutdowns during elections in Uganda reveals a pattern of escalation. During the 2016 elections, authorities limited restrictions to primarily social media platforms over four days during elections and again during the presidential inauguration. In 2021, initial block of social media platforms  were followed by a complete internet shutdown which saw access to digital communication affected for a total of five days. This month’s polls witnessed a complete shutdown from just before the onset of the elections, reflecting the control of state power over digital infrastructure.

Prior to the shutdown, the services of satellite internet provider Starlink, which operates independently of terrestrial networks, were halted in Uganda after a regulatory directive, rendering all Starlink terminals inactive ahead of polling day.  Starlink was providing services without a valid local license. Critics argued that the directive served to limit alternatives for connectivity in the event of broader restrictions, feeding anxieties about reduced access to independent channels of information.

Away from restrictions to online connectivity, state power has also been reflected in the tight control over media narratives, undermining its watchdog role. This has been witnessed through restricting the live broadcast of “riots, unlawful processions, or violent incidents” and the barring of journalists from the privately owned Nation Media Group-Uganda from covering Museveni’s campaign and events since March 2025, in addition to denying them access to parliament since October 2025. Meanwhile, there were various assaults and the intimidation of journalists in an effort to “silence scrutiny of public affairs”.

The electoral process itself has been marred by controversy including queries on the failure of the Biometric Voter Verification Kits (BVVKs) on voting day resulting in voter apathy and delays. The Electoral Commission’s spokesperson acknowledged that some aspects of the BVVK such as voter verification did require internet access to function. The contingency measure provided was the manual verification of voters at polling stations. The state made a total investment of approximately 469.5 billion Uganda Shillings (UGX) (USD 131.9 million) in December 2025 to support what was considered critical preparatory activities for the just concluded general election. Of this investment, at least UGX 53.8 billion (USD 15.1 million) was dedicated to the BVVK.

Further, the earlier suspension of various non-governmental organisations and the arrest and intimation of various state critics including Dr. Saarah Bireete on charges of unlawful access to voters’ register data, and Dr. Kizza Besigye on charges of treason,  reflected a narrowed democratic space in the lead up to and during the election. These actions were often accompanied by announcements of protecting national security, managing disinformation, and maintaining public order.

The internet shutdown also affected daily livelihoods of millions of ordinary people within Uganda as it  severed access to basic online interactions including checking up on friends and family. It also affected formal and informal sector transactions through mobile money, digital marketplaces, and online channels that traders, boda boda riders, market vendors, gig workers, freelancers, and small-scale entrepreneurs use to conduct commerce, advertise and deliver services. In many cases, these workers were forced to revert to cash-based transactions, exposing them to heightened insecurity, loss of business, and reduced earnings. For others, such as ride hailing applications, online purchases and delivery sections, economic activity stalled altogether.

News reports state that many actors in the financial sector remained tight lipped about their possible losses following the shutdown. According to the Uganda Revenue Authority, the state lost income due to the internet shutdown affecting revenue collections – the deadline for filing monthly tax returns fell within the shutdown on January 15. The landlocked country further lost tax revenue clearance costs paid in by trucks at the various border points while tourism was also affected. The shutdown also affected mobile money services upon which millions of Uganda’s informal sector rely on. Cash withdrawals using the service were also blocked.

The events surrounding Uganda’s internet shutdown highlight the tension between the state, media, civil society, and the rights of citizens at critical moments such as elections. This tension also affects access to information, freedom of expression and the tenets of digital democracy. It undermines accountability and transparency in democratic processes paving the way for abuse, violations and impunity. Ultimately, internet shutdowns raise questions about whether such measures are necessary or proportionate particularly at a time when digital platforms have become the basis of livelihoods, civic engagement and basic services for millions of people who engage directly online and at the periphery of digital access, including those who are not online, digitally savvy or even have the devices to access the digital society.

Uganda’s case is not isolated as the country joins numerous others who in recent months have ordered shutdowns around election periods, protests, and national exams, when authorities perceive digital communication as a threat to public order. In the last 12 months, internet shutdowns have been seen across the continent including during elections in Tanzania and Cameroon, conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, a military coup in Guinea-Bissau, and environmental protests in Equatorial Guinea’s Annobón island.

13Jan

Uganda’s Election and the Lingering Legacy of Internet Blockage

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Juliet Nanfuka |

In two days, as Uganda heads to its presidential and parliamentary elections slated for January 15, 2026, citizens, civil society actors, journalists, and digital rights defenders were stumped with the question, “will they shut down the internet again?” Or, this time, will we see a commitment to adherence to one of the basic fundamentals of digital democracy and have an election in which access to digital communications remains open?  

In recent weeks, anxiety about an impending internet blackout has surged despite Dr. Aminah Zawedde, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance, and Hon. Nyombi Thembo, Executive Director of the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC), dismissing rumours of plans to shut down the internet, calling them “false and misleading”.

However, for many, these pronouncements have done little to quell suspicions, especially due to the actions witnessed during the 2016 and 2021 elections. During those previous two elections, access to digital communications was restricted, resulting in a block to online communication, commerce, and key avenues for civic engagement.

Various actions in the lead up to the polls have also served to compound the suspicions. In a report issued in January 2026, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) describes the arrests of state critics as “arbitrary and discriminatory” and outside of the country’s constitutional guarantees.

“Despite the strong constitutional protection of rights, the human rights situation in Uganda during the period under review has been characterized by increasingly restrictive legislation and their arbitrary and discriminatory application. The Government of Uganda has continued to rely on legislation such as the Public Order Management Act (POMA), the Anti-Terrorism Act, the NGO Act, the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act and the Penal Code Act to shrink civic and democratic space and further weaken political participation, particularly of political opponents and their supporters, as well as the work of civil society, including journalists and human rights defenders.” OHCHR Report on Uganda

Meanwhile, independent media has come under increasing pressure, experiencing various forms of clampdowns in the lead up to the elections, including the denial of advertising spend. In October 2025, independent outlets – NTV Uganda and The Daily Monitor – were denied accreditation to cover parliamentary and presidential proceedings. Reports of harassment, equipment confiscation as well as attacks on journalists during election campaign coverage, and raids on media offices, have been commonplace – underscoring a deteriorating environment for media freedom.

Meanwhile the satellite internet provider Starlink, which has services that can operate independently of terrestrial networks, was halted in Uganda after a regulatory directive in early January 2026, rendering all Starlink terminals inactive ahead of polling day. The satellite internet service provider was providing  services without a valid local license. Critics still argue that the directive serves to limit alternatives for connectivity in the event of broader restrictions on internet access, feeding anxieties about reduced access to independent channels of information.

The UCC has also come under fire following its warning to broadcasters and digital content creators against live coverage of riots, protests, or incidents that could disrupt public order. The regulator stated that only the Electoral Commission may declare election results, and sharing unverified results is illegal. Dr. Zawedde stated, “Media platforms must not be abused to incite violence, spread misinformation, or undermine the credibility of the electoral process.”

By the afternoon of January 13, 2026, a directive circulating online had been issued by UCC to mobile network operators to block public access to the internet, effective at 18:00.

In a public statement, Access Now and the global #KeepItOn coalition had urged President Yoweri Museveni and relevant national authorities to ensure unrestricted internet access throughout the electoral period and to refrain from any disruptive measures that impede the free flow of information. The statement stresses the fundamental role that connectivity plays in inclusive participation, freedom of expression, and the credibility of the electoral process.

Likewise, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) also reaffirmed that internet access is a core human right and a necessary condition for free and fair elections, warning against restrictions that would stifle civic space. The Commission called on the Government of Uganda to ratify the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, signed on January 27, 2013, which emphasises the importance of a culture of peaceful change of power based on regular, free, fair and transparent elections conducted by competent, independent and impartial electoral bodies.

For democracy to flourish in Uganda, authorities must demonstrate their commitment to open digital spaces. This means not only publicly guaranteeing uninterrupted internet access before, during, and after the elections but also building trust through transparency and accountability.  Citizens deserve to communicate freely, monitor the electoral process, and hold all actors accountable without fear of arbitrary disruption.

Ultimately, Uganda’s electoral credibility will not be judged by what happens at polling stations, but by whether the state resists the temptation to control information by disrupting digital access. In an era where civic participation, journalism, election transparency, and even livelihoods heavily rely on digital access, a disruption would signal a fear of accountability.

If the government chooses restraint in the coming hours, it would mark a major departure from a troubling past and offer Ugandans a rare assurance in the election process. If it does not, history will record yet another election where the digital access was shut down to presumably manage dissent rather than protect democracy.

29Dec

Samantha Sibanda

Author CIPESA Posted on

Who is Samantha Sibanda?

I am a human rights advocate and survivor of mental health issues who has dedicated the past decade of her life to championing the rights of persons with disabilities. In 2014, I founded the Signs of Hope Trust, an organisation for persons with disabilities, which focuses on access to information, digital rights, and inclusion, as well as inclusive civic engagement and public finance management.

I am also a trainer in the Freedom of Information Act, selected by the Zimbabwe Media Commission to support government entities and the public in understanding the Act and improving transparency and accessible information practices. My advocacy work is grounded in the principles of Ubuntu, which utilise community-driven and collaborative approaches to achieve change.

My motivation to work on disability and digital rights stems from a combination of personal experience and what I’ve observed in my own community. As a survivor of mental health challenges, I was drawn into advocacy through my own journey, and I continue to support community-based rehabilitation and mental health champions in my work.

As for digital rights, it grew naturally from my work at Signs of Hope Trust. For many years, we shared information via WhatsApp and other platforms to bridge information gaps for persons with disabilities. However, at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, between 2020 and 2021, the disability digital divide became more apparent. Everything shifted to online, including education, communication, and public services, and many individuals with disabilities were left behind due to inaccessible technologies, limited data, or a lack of access to devices.

That moment pushed me to focus intentionally on digital inclusion. We also added Digital Rights as a core programming area at Signs of Hope Trust, and I have continued to champion this work from the grassroots level, where our communities are most affected.

There have been tremendous efforts to expand digital rights and inclusion for persons with disabilities in Africa. The digital divide related to disabilities has become a key topic at most digital rights convenings that I have been privileged to attend. Regionally, the AfricanUnion (AU) Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Africa came into force in May 2024, reinforcing the legal basis for accessible ICT [Information and Communications Technology], barrier-free access to communication systems, and the right to information.

Alongside this, more organisations are adopting accessibility standards, governments are integrating disability inclusion into national digital strategies, and communities are increasingly vocal about the need for accessible online services. While gaps remain, the momentum is good, and the conversation is shifting from awareness to implementation.

I want to commend CIPESA for developing the Disability& ICT Accessibility Framework Indicators. I have personally used these in our research in Zimbabwe, and I have seen more studies that have used them.  This is a crucial tool for data-driven advocacy and enhancing access to ICT for persons with disabilities.

Additionally, Universal Service Funds are increasingly being used to finance assistive technologies and expand connectivity, while community-based efforts, such as community networks supported by the Internet Society, are bringing internet access to remote areas. In Zimbabwe, there are community information centres which provide shared devices, internet connectivity, and training spaces for persons with disabilities who may not have individual access. Lastly, emerging satellite internet solutions, such as Starlink, are bringing reliable internet access to remote areas.

These innovations, when combined with accessible design, digital literacy programmes, and advocacy for inclusive policy, are creating practical pathways for persons with disabilities to participate fully in the digital world.

There are several pressing challenges that threaten digital rights and inclusion for persons with disabilities in Africa. One emerging concern is the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, such as generative AI chatbots and image generators, which can reproduce harmful biases and create misinformation that is difficult to fact-check. This disproportionately affects persons with disabilities, who often lack access to digital literacy and critical information verification skills. Information disorders, including deepfakes and manipulated content, further exacerbate these risks.

Ableism remains another persistent barrier, carried into online spaces and contributing to self-censorship or exclusion of persons with disabilities from digital participation. It also shapes whose voices are considered in policymaking, often leaving persons with disabilities sidelined in laws and digital governance.

I often reference the seven pillars of inclusion, and when contextualised to digital rights, several stand out. First, inclusive policy frameworks must provide tangible ways to embed the needs of these groups into national and regional digital strategies and practices. Communication should be accessible, transparent, timely, multilingual, and adaptable to diverse abilities, ensuring that information reaches everyone.

Offering choice in how people engage digitally allows communities to use tools and platforms that best suit their needs. Building strong partnerships across government, civil society, industry, and community networks amplifies impact and accountability. Accessibility must be prioritised in both digital content and devices, ensuring that platforms are usable by all. Web accessibility guidelines should be applied when developing websites to ensure they are accessible to all users.

29Dec

Mohamed Kimbugwe 

Author CIPESA Posted on

Who is Mohamed Kimbugwe?

My name is Mohamed Kimbugwe, an International Development Practitioner with over one and a half decades of experience and expertise in Human-centred Digital Transformation and Innovation. As a disability, digital rights, and inclusion expert and advocate, I believe in a world that works for all, including in the digital realm. I believe that digital technologies have the power to surpass traditional barriers and open a world of opportunities for persons with disabilities. Living with a hearing disability myself, I know more than anyone else the power of accessible technologies and how much they offer from education to work, communication, and all spheres of human endeavour. I also know how limiting it can be if digital technologies are not designed either to accommodate disability or accelerate the inclusion of persons with disabilities.

It all started with the onset of my hearing loss around 2007. That’s when it dawned on me that unless workplaces were inclusive, my work life and career growth would be an uphill task. Communication, as I knew it, became limited, and I was growing increasingly isolated from social activities. Around the same time, social media and digital messaging platforms were taking root. I was captivated by the opportunities they all offered. Being able to stay in touch with friends, build my own network, and even pursue remote employment opportunities online.

However, it quickly dawned on me that it wasn’t all glitter. I started bumping into videos without captions. I realised then that while digital spaces were opening immense opportunities, they had their limitations, and we had to work deliberately towards removing barriers and making digital spaces fully accessible. 

There has been significant progress over the years. The digital rights and inclusion movement has gained momentum, and there’s increased awareness. It is not uncommon to find accessibility as a core aspect of continental, regional, and national digital transformation policies, frameworks, and strategies. Digital Accessibility conversations are now an integral part of continental forums such as the Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa. 

Countries like Kenya, South Africa, and Rwanda have strengthened their commitment to disability-inclusive technology policies, promoting accessible digital services, inclusive design, and equal access to public digital platforms. At the continental level, frameworks such as the Protocol to the African Charter on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Agenda 2063 have reinforced these commitments. Alongside policy, the availability and use of assistive digital tools (screen readers, sign-language translation apps, hearing-assist technologies, e-learning accessibility features, and AI-powered communication support) have grown, with local innovators developing low-cost solutions tailored to African contexts.

Accessible e-government services are also expanding in countries like Rwanda, Namibia, Egypt, Mauritius, and South Africa, incorporating voice navigation, multilingual options, simplified interfaces, and accessible application systems for social services, education, and healthcare. National digital skills programs and innovation hubs are increasingly supporting young persons with disabilities, with initiatives from the Australian Government, GIZ, UNICEF, UNESCO, Microsoft, and local organisations enhancing training in coding, digital entrepreneurship, and online freelancing. Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs) are gaining influence in digital policy, data protection, and AI governance, while inclusive tech communities are growing across Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, South Africa, and Ghana. Public and private institutions are beginning to adopt global accessibility standards, such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), signalling a rising awareness and momentum for truly inclusive digital spaces.

Progress in digital inclusion in Africa remains limited, with connectivity expensive, interventions scattered, and stakeholders often working in silos, which restricts scaling and impact. Both public and private sector funding is minimal, enforcement of accessibility and inclusion policies is weak, the skills gap is widening, and interoperability between accessible platforms and widely used systems remains a challenge.

The cost of connectivity and assistive technologies, including data prices, smartphones, and devices, remains high, making them largely unaffordable for many. To address this, we must prioritise subsidised data bundles, tax exemptions for assistive technologies, zero-rating disability-related content, and supporting the local production of affordable assistive devices.

Emerging technologies are evolving faster than inclusion efforts. AI systems, digital IDs, e-learning tools, and mobile apps are often developed without considering accessibility, which can lead to algorithmic bias and exclusion. It is therefore crucial to entrench accessibility-by-design in all public digital services and extend disability inclusion from national AI and emerging tech policies into practice.

The scarcity of context-specific and inclusive data for AI systems threatens to deepen exclusion, making it essential to develop African disability-inclusive datasets and ensure representation of persons with disabilities in testing, training, and regulation.

Digital safety threats, online harassment, and cybercrime disproportionately affect persons with disabilities, especially women, yet digital safety tools are often inaccessible. Integrating accessible digital safety education into skills programs and ensuring platforms adopt WCAG-compliant safety features, such as accessible reporting tools, audio guidance, and captioning, is critical to protecting and empowering marginalised users in digital spaces.

Building trust and strengthening collaboration in Africa’s disability rights movement requires intentional structures, shared accountability, and clear mechanisms for co-creation across governments, intergovernmental bodies, civil society, industry, media, and academia.

Trust is earned not through statements but through consistent, transparent, and inclusive action. To achieve this, it is crucial to establish inclusive and permanent multi-stakeholder platforms that move beyond short-term, project-based collaborations to sustainable partnerships with formal structures and established processes. Equally important is building and sharing a common evidence base: harmonised data standards, a continental digital inclusion observatory, and unified research agendas ensure that decisions are informed by shared facts, strengthening credibility and trust.

Promoting genuine co-creation rather than tokenistic participation is essential, ensuring that persons with disabilities are involved throughout the design lifecycle of policies, technologies, and services, not just at the end. Strengthening accountability and transparency is also crucial, as trust erodes when commitments are not met.

This can be achieved through annual digital accessibility scorecards for governments and service providers, publishing commitments and progress as open data, and including independent monitoring mechanisms led by coalitions of Disabled Persons’ Organisations, human rights bodies, and academic institutions. Together, these pathways create a collaborative, credible, and sustainable approach to advancing disability rights and digital inclusion across Africa.

To ensure that persons with disabilities and other marginalised groups, such as women, youth, and older persons, are included in digital rights and inclusion efforts in Africa, we must adopt a holistic, rights-based approach.

This includes creating and enforcing inclusive laws and policies, designing accessible technologies and platforms, and promoting affordable assistive tools. Targeted digital literacy programs, community hubs, and mentorship initiatives can build skills and confidence, while awareness campaigns and success stories help shift social norms. Affordable internet, devices, and support for digital entrepreneurship remove economic barriers, and disaggregated data, inclusive governance, and cross-sector collaboration ensure accountability and sustained impact. Inclusion is achieved when policy, technology, education, and advocacy work together to remove barriers and empower all members of society.

1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 44