Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Tag Archives: Human rights

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Human rights
29May

Lessons from Ethiopia’s Disability Inclusion Conference for Africa’s Telecom Sector

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

On April 24, 2026, Safaricom Ethiopia Telecommunications convened a Disability Inclusion Conference in Addis Ababa. While opening the conference, Safaricom Ethiopia CEO, Wim Vanhelleputte emphasised the importance of involving persons with disabilities in the design of digital products and services by invoking the principle of “Nothing About Us Without Us.”

The conference, which brought together stakeholders from government, academia, tech companies, Disabled Persons Organisations (DPOs), and civil society, nevertheless highlighted a more persistent reality. For the approximately 15-17 million Ethiopians living with a disability, roughly one in six people, the disconnect between policy commitments and lived reality remains significant in access to services and devices.

As Abayneh Gujo, Executive Director of the Federation of Ethiopian Associations of Persons with Disabilities (FEAPD), noted during the conference, the disconnect continues to affect access not only to digital services, but also to education, healthcare, and economic opportunity. Many other African countries face a similar gap.

A Sector That Continues to Treat Accessibility as Optional
Findings from a CIPESA report, Access Denied: How Telecom Operators in Africa Are Failing Persons with Disabilities, show that major telecom companies across markets in Africa continue to treat accessibility as a secondary consideration. The study assessed 10 telecom companies in Botswana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda. For example, staff were untrained and often unaware of what accessible products existed. Procurement policies did not require accessibility features, while physical access to sales outlets was poor. Discounted rates for persons with disabilities were virtually non-existent, with only Vodacom South Africa offering them in the form of a modest SMS bundle for customers with hearing impairments.

These shortcomings reflect a sector that has long treated accessibility as optional, often framing it as corporate social responsibility rather than a legal obligation. There has been progress since the report, but it has been driven by individual company initiatives rather than coordinated, sector-wide change anchored in regulatory standards and enforceable requirements.

Even where accessibility features exist, accessible smartphones, assistive technologies and mobile data remain out of reach for many persons with disabilities, especially in rural and low-income settings. This is because access depends not only on whether technologies are available, but whether people can afford to use them consistently over time. Studies, including by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), identify affordability as a major barrier to digital inclusion, yet telecom pricing and product design still rarely reflect the realities faced by persons with disabilities.

What Ethiopia Must Do
Ethiopia has ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and has disability-related provisions in existing laws. However, the country still lacks a comprehensive and enforceable disability rights law. Such a law should set clear obligations on telecom operators, broadcasters and digital service providers, including standards for accessible customer care, websites, mobile applications and emergency communications. In the absence of such a framework, accountability rests largely on goodwill.

Beyond legislation, Ethiopia has an opportunity to use its newly established Universal Access Fund, administered by the Ethiopian Communications Authority, to finance accessible digital centres, assistive devices, software, and skills-building programmes for persons with disabilities. As the country expands its digital public infrastructure, such as mobile money, e-government services, and digital identity systems, accessibility cannot remain an afterthought that is addressed only after systems are deployed.

What Telecom Operators Must Do
Based on CIPESA’s research, telecom operators need to prioritise accessibility by establishing an accessibility function at the senior management level, and embedding universal design into products and services from the earliest stages of development. As Karen Smit, Accessibility Lead at Vodacom Group, noted, many of the barriers experienced by persons with disabilities are created not by disability itself, but by how technologies, systems and environments are designed.

Operators also need procurement policies that require accessible handsets to be stocked across outlets, including in rural areas, alongside practical training for customer-facing staff on accessibility and assistive technologies. Regular user experience research with Disabled Persons Organisations (DPOs) should become standard practice rather than a one-off consultation exercise. As Vanhelleputte argued in his opening remarks, inclusion is not about designing for persons with disabilities, but designing with them.

One finding from CIPESA’s research still stands out. Several operators do not have reliable data on the number of customers with disabilities. Disaggregating customer data by disability status is a necessary foundation for any serious inclusion strategy.

Operators should also recognise that accessible design is good business. Captions, voice navigation and simplified interfaces benefit older users, people with low digital literacy and anyone navigating a screen in difficult conditions. Features initially developed for persons with disabilities, such as audiobooks and voice-based tools, have often become popular and proved beneficial to broader groups of users.

Safaricom Ethiopia can build on Vodacom’s accessibility initiatives in South Africa and Safaricom Kenya’s disability employment targets and digital skills programmes to move from commitments to measurable implementation. This includes conducting accessibility audits across retail outlets and digital platforms, improving accessibility across customer service channels, embedding accessibility into services such as M-PESA, and establishing sustained partnerships with DPOs to support ongoing user testing and co-design.

At the Addis conference, Vanhelleputte noted that accessible e-learning, telemedicine and mobile money can help bypass barriers that have historically excluded persons with disabilities from economic and social life.

According to Dr Wairagala Wakabi, the Executive Director of Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), the next step for telecom operators is ensuring that these commitments are reflected in everyday customer experience, backed by clear targets, public reporting, and sustained engagement between telecom operators, regulators, government, civil society and organisations of persons with disabilities.

From Commitment to Action
Some civil society actors are doing their part through research, advocacy and sustained engagement. However, this is not a substitute for what regulators, governments and telecom operators are obliged to do through enforceable commitments, clear standards, and measurable implementation.

For Africa’s estimated 260 million persons with disabilities, digital inclusion must stop being a conference theme and start being a measurable reality. As governments digitise banking, identity systems, healthcare and public services, inaccessible digital infrastructure increasingly means exclusion from economic and civic life itself.

CIPESA will continue documenting these gaps, engaging stakeholders, and holding the sector to account until meaningful inclusion is achieved.

22May

Zimbabwe’s National AI Strategy: Policy Lessons for Africa

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Edrine Wanyama |

Zimbabwe recently adopted its National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Strategy 2026–2030 (AI strategy)  to guide digital technology and transformation in the country. The strategy aims to accelerate development, enhance industrialisation, and improve service delivery in sectors such as health, finance, agriculture, education and public administration. The strategy emphasises building local data infrastructure as opposed to relying on foreign data storage infrastructure while promoting an AI governance approach grounded in Ubuntu, human rights, accountability, transparency and inclusivity.

However, an important question is whether Zimbabwe’s approach offers useful lessons for other African countries developing national AI strategies.

Lessons for Other African Countries

The country’s AI strategy is organised around six pillars that together map a practical path for AI adoption and deployment. First, AI talent and capacity development is essential for ensuring that institutions have the skills needed to implement AI effectively. Second, AI infrastructure and computational sovereignty are necessary for ensuring digital and data sovereignty. Third, AI adoption and service transformation are critical for supporting the integration of AI across public and private sectors to improve their productivity, accountability and transparency.

The fourth pillar, AI governance, ethics and regulation, is essential for building public trust and creating a framework that supports responsible innovation. The fifth pillar, AI research, development, and innovation, can drive investments, expand knowledge production and strengthen academic output. The sixth pillar, strategic international collaboration, presents an opportunity for global partnerships with key players and stakeholders, technology exchange, and potentially greater investment.  

Consequently, these pillars offer useful lessons for other countries seeking to harness AI for socio-economic transformation while protecting data rights and data sovereignty.

Alignment with the African Union (AU) AI Strategy

Zimbabwe’s AI Strategy reflects several priorities contained in the AU Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy, particularly the emphasis on coordinated AI governance, digital sovereignty, and sectoral innovation. Zimbabwe’s strategy aims to harmonise the deployment and use of AI across sectors such as health, finance, agriculture, education and public administration through common governance benchmarks for AI governance. If implemented effectively, these goals could help to address digital neo-colonialism, an issue that has been dominant in Africa’s technological space.

The Strategy also places strong emphasis on AI as a tool for socio-economic development, aligning with Agenda 2063 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly in sectors such as health, agriculture, and education. The Strategy promotes the deployment of AI to improve agriculture through crop disease prevention, as well as mining and mineral development, which is consistent with the AU AI strategy’s priorities on resource optimisation and climate resilience.

However, Zimbabwe faces significant governance and implementation challenges. The country scored 0 in the 2024 Global Index on Responsible AI Governance, highlighting the gap between policy ambition and institutional readiness. This means it requires major actions to implement the strategy, such as the establishment of robust legal safeguards, accountability mechanisms, oversight institutions, and rights-based governance frameworks, which are also emphasised within the AU strategy.  Other African countries can draw lessons from Zimbabwe’s approach, such as the need to complement AI strategies with stronger governance capacity, clearer regulatory safeguards, and more coherent data governance frameworks to support responsible and accountable AI deployment.

UNESCO Guidance on AI

The UNESCO Recommendations on Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, adopted in 2021, is a global normative framework that promotes human rights, including human dignity, transparency, fairness, human oversight in AI systems, and democratic participation. It also provides practical policy action areas covering issues such as data governance, gender, education and research, health, and social wellbeing.

While the UNESCO Guidance is emphatic on ethical and privacy considerations, Zimbabwe’s strategy falls short. Ambitions to integrate AI into public service delivery sectors such as education, health, and public administration will require stronger safeguards to ensure alignment with the human-centric principles articulated in the UNESCO framework. In the age of AI, data security concerns, intellectual property rights, algorithmic bias, and institutional accountability are central to responsible deployment of AI and require clearer policy and regulatory attention.

Similarly, the UNESCO Guidance warns against the use of AI in a manner that undermines democratic participation, civic engagement, and collective decision-making. This is especially important in contexts where surveillance technologies such as facial recognition, drone monitoring, communication tracking, and social media surveillance are deployed without clear safeguards or independent oversight. Zimbabwe, like several other African countries, has invested in AI-enabled infrastructures, such as the “smart city” systems to monitor and surveil citizens in ways that are opaque and lack clear accountability mechanisms.

As African countries continue developing national AI strategies and governance frameworks, they must strive to ensure that the deployment of AI is transparent, publicly accountable, and pays close attention to ethical and human rights standards. Without these safeguards, AI risks reinforcing exclusion, surveillance, and digital authoritarianism rather than advancing development.

Conclusion

Zimbabwe’s adoption of an AI Strategy is an important step toward advancing tech-enabled digital and socio-economic transformation. It also reflects the country’s intent to align national priorities with the African Union’s vision for AI-driven development across the entire continent. However, for such strategies to be effective and legitimate, they must be grounded in ethical and human rights standards laid down in regional and international benchmarks.

11May

Outpaced by Its Own Ambition: Can Kenya Bridge Its AI Regulation  Gap?

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Raylenne Kambua |

The raw paradox at the heart of Kenya’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) moment is that the country is simultaneously sprinting ahead in AI adoption while grappling with a shrinking space for the very digital voices that AI empowers.

According to the Digital Global Update Report, Kenya recorded the world’s highest usage rate of AI tools in 2025, with 42.1% of internet users aged 16 and above reporting active use of AI-powered technologies. This level of usage indicates that AI is increasingly being woven into the daily life of Kenyans.

However, the Navigating the Implications of AI on Digital Democracy in Kenya report by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) highlights that while AI empowers citizens, it also enables unprecedented surveillance and manipulation.

A Nation Leading the Way in AI Adoption

Kenya has made significant investments in digital services, innovation hubs, and connectivity under the National Digital Master Plan 2022–2032.

These developments are also transforming how citizens interact with the government. Tools such as the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner’s Linda Data chatbot and platforms such as Sauti ya Bajeti have expanded access to rights information and budget tracking.

Yet, even as AI delivered clear benefits, it also revealed its dual nature, most visibly during the 2024 #RejectFinanceBill protests, during which Gen Zs mobilised through AI-generated infographics, satire, and short-form videos. At the height of the protests on June 25, a nationwide internet disruption was enforced despite assurances from the Communications Authority. The disruption was confirmed by network monitors like Cloudflare and NetBlocks, exposing the fragility of internet freedom in Kenya.

Civil society condemned the internet shutdown as a violation of rights, while telecoms Safaricom and Airtel attributed it to outages in their undersea cable. In the aftermath, reports of abductions and enforced disappearances of digital activists escalated, with the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights documenting at least 82 cases between June and December 2024.

Kenya’s AI Policy Landscape

The launch of the Kenya National AI Strategy 2025–2030 in March 2025 signalled the country’s ambition to position itself as Africa’s leading AI innovation hub. The strategy prioritises governance, ethics, investment, digital infrastructure, data ecosystem development, and support for AI research and innovation.

Kenya has also strengthened its international profile through participation in programmes such as the United Nations High-Level Advisory Board on AI, joining the International Network of AI Safety Institutes, and assuming leadership in the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS+20).

At the national level, initiatives such as Digital Platforms Kenya (DigiKen) and the Kenya Bureau of Standards’ draft AI Code of Practice reflect growing momentum toward operationalising AI governance and skills building. The government is also developing an AI and Emerging Technologies Policy and a Data Governance Policy, both of which are expected to be in place by July 2026.

However, the gap between ambition and readiness remains wide. Kenya ranks 93rd in the 2025 Government AI Readiness Index, due to persistent weaknesses in infrastructure, implementation, and institutional capacity.

Moreover, Kenya’s legal framework for AI remains fragmented and incomplete. Currently, there is no standalone AI law in force, but a controversial Artificial Intelligence Bill, 2026, that has raised significant concerns about over-regulation and censorship  is under discussion. Additionally regulation is based on broader laws such as the Data Protection Act 2019 and the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act 2018, which were not designed to address AI-specific risks such as deepfakes, automated decision-making, algorithmic discrimination, or synthetic disinformation.

As highlighted in the CIPESA report, critical gaps remain in the use of AI. These include the absence of mandatory algorithmic impact assessments, weak safeguards against AI-driven surveillance such as facial recognition, and scant measures to address AI-generated electoral misinformation. Furthermore, regulatory authorities lack sufficient capabilities to audit and monitor sophisticated AI systems, and there are no clear licensing or accountability frameworks for AI creators and deployers.

“Without deliberate, inclusive, and rights-centred governance, AI risks entrenching authoritarianism and exacerbating inequalities.” (Navigating the Implications of AI on Digital Democracy in Kenya, 2025)

The Way Ahead: AI Governance Focused on Human Rights

The CIPESA report outlines a human rights–centred approach to AI governance that is built on the following key principles:

  1. Life-Centred and Human-Centred Design and Accountability: AI should support and not replace human judgment, with strong oversight to ensure transparency and accountability.
  2. Equity and Fairness: Design AI to prevent bias and expand inclusive access, especially for underrepresented groups.
  3. Transparency and Trust: Ensure AI systems are explainable, well-documented, and open to public scrutiny and challenge.
  4. Safety, Security and Resilience: Build resilient systems with ongoing risk assessments and strong protections against misuse.
  5. International Collaboration and Ethical AI Development: Advance ethical AI through international collaboration while upholding constitutional values and human oversight.
  6. Environmental sustainability: Align AI development with climate resilience and sustainable resource use.
  7. Inclusive Participation and Cultural Relevance: Reflect local diversity and involve marginalised communities in AI design.
  8. Robust Governance and Adaptive Regulation: Maintain flexible, responsive regulation that keeps pace with technological change.

The report calls for a coordinated, multi-stakeholder approach to AI governance. It recommends that:

  • The government should enact a comprehensive AI law aligned with constitutional and international human rights standards, establish a legally mandated National AI Advisory Council with inclusive representation and strong enforcement powers.  It should also introduce clear prohibitions on high-risk practices such as real-time biometric surveillance without judicial oversight.
  • Civil society and the media should strengthen public awareness, promote accountability, and counter AI-driven disinformation.
  • Private sector actors should uphold transparency, fairness, and ethical standards across AI systems, including fair labour practices. Labour protections must be guaranteed for gig workers and data annotators within the AI value chain.
  • Academia and research institutions should continue generating evidence that can guide context-specific policy and regulation.
  • Across all stakeholders, digital literacy must be expanded, especially in underserved and rural communities, so that citizens can understand and challenge AI systems that affect them.

With the ongoing legislative processes on AI, this is a pivotal time for Kenya, as it has the momentum and the attention of the world. But momentum without action will not work. The country cannot afford slow, fragmented debates while technology is fast progressing. Additionally, Kenya must strike a careful balance between regulation and innovation, as overly restrictive rules could limit access, slow local innovation, and lock the country out of AI’s economic and social benefits. The goal should be a flexible, forward-looking framework that protects rights while still enabling growth and opportunity.

Read the full report, Navigating the Implications of AI on Digital Democracy in Kenya.

11May

CIPESA Urges Rights-Centred Approach to Uganda’s AI Strategy

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) has submitted recommendations to Uganda’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Emerging Technologies Strategy national taskforce, calling for a human rights-centred approach to the governance of these technologies.

The submission, made in response to the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance’s ongoing process to develop a National AI and Emerging Technologies Strategy, welcomes Uganda’s ambition to harness AI for development. At the same time, CIPESA cautions that innovation must be matched with the legal, institutional, and ethical safeguards needed to protect people from harms.

Discussions on Uganda’s AI policy come at a moment when AI technologies are already being deployed in both public and private sectors. The submission states that AI-enhanced tools are currently employed in customs risk profiling at the Uganda Revenue Authority, customer service functions, digital financial services, research organisations, and environmental monitoring initiatives.

In agriculture, AI-powered tools can support weather forecasting, pest detection, control and prevention, and tailored advice for farmers, whereas in healthcare, they can enhance disease detection, diagnostics, prescription and help address shortages in medical personnel. These applications highlight the transformative potential of AI, yet there are also concerns around surveillance, exclusion, discrimination, and misuse of personal data.

The submission is informed by CIPESA’s broader work on digital rights in Africa, including the Navigating the Implications of AI on Digital Democracy in Uganda report, which emphasises the growing impact of AI-driven technologies on online expression, political communication, surveillance practices, and civic participation.

The recommendations also build on CIPESA’s earlier work on developing an inclusive AI ecosystem for Uganda. According to the policy brief, An Artificial Intelligence Eco-System for Uganda, the country’s existing legal and policy frameworks provide a fragmented foundation for regulating AI and responding to emerging risks such as algorithmic bias, automated discrimination, opaque decision-making, and AI-enabled surveillance.

Accordingly, CIPESA calls for a rights-by-design approach to AI governance. High-risk AI systems used by both public and private actors should be transparent, auditable, and subject to independent oversight. It also calls for mandatory Human Rights Impact Assessments for AI systems used in sensitive sectors such as healthcare, agriculture, education, taxation, law enforcement, and social protection.

The submission further recommends dedicated legal and policy measures that address algorithmic transparency, automated decision-making, public-sector AI procurement, safeguards against discriminatory outcomes, and mechanisms for redress where harm occurs.

CIPESA also raises concerns about the growing use of automated systems in areas such as digital lending and mobile money services, where millions of Ugandans are already subjected to algorithmic profiling and automated credit scoring with limited transparency or accountability. The submission recommends that Uganda’s AI strategy should establish clear safeguards and oversight standards for both existing and future AI systems.

While AI presents significant opportunities for improving public service delivery and supporting development priorities, CIPESA stresses that such systems must be built using representative local datasets, and designed in ways that minimise bias, exclusion, and discriminatory outcomes.

The organisation further stresses that AI governance must be inclusive and participatory. The submission calls for meaningful involvement of civil society organisations, academia, technical experts, and affected communities in shaping Uganda’s AI strategy. It also recommends multilingual and accessible AI-enabled platforms that support citizen participation through channels that are accessible to underserved and low-literacy communities.

Beyond governance safeguards, CIPESA urges the government to invest in local AI research, innovation, and infrastructure development. It recommends support for universities, innovation hubs, and local startups, alongside the establishment of national AI research centres and dedicated funding mechanisms. Earlier recommendations by CIPESA also proposed the creation of a national AI Research Fund and citizen awareness programmes to improve public understanding of AI technologies and their societal implications.

Without deliberate investment in local capacity, Uganda risks becoming merely a supplier of raw data to foreign technology companies while deriving limited economic value from AI technologies. This would also deepen dependence on externally developed systems that may not fully reflect local contexts, needs, or priorities.

CIPESA additionally calls for alignment between Uganda’s strategy and broader regional initiatives, including the African Union Continental AI Strategy and wider African efforts on digital governance, data protection, and platform accountability.

Ultimately, CIPESA argues that Uganda’s AI and Emerging Technologies Strategy should put people first, ensuring that innovation and emerging technologies are matched with clear safeguards and meaningful oversight.

Read the full submission here: CIPESA Submissions on Uganda AI and Emerging Technology Strategy

01May

Tanzania’s Digital Rights Record Faces Fresh Scrutiny at the UPR

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Ainembabazi Patricia |

In November 2026, Tanzania will be up for its fourth cycle review under the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism of the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC). Ahead of the review, the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), the Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU), and JamiiAfrica made a joint stakeholder submission on the state of digital rights including expression, access to information, assembly and association, privacy, data protection, and gender equality in digital spaces in Tanzania.

The submission recognises the positive steps taken by Tanzania to advance the digital ecosystem  since its previous assessment in 2021. Internet connectivity has expanded significantly, and the country has adopted important digital governance measures. These include the enactment of the Personal Data Protection Act, 2022, and the establishment of the Personal Data Protection Commission, reforms to the Media Services Act, and policy initiatives such as the Digital Economy Strategic Framework 2024–2034, and emerging AI governance frameworks.

However, the report finds that these gains have not translated into a freer or safer digital civic space in the country. Repressive laws and regulations continue to be used to restrict online expression, limit publications, silence dissent and elevate censorship. The Electronic and Postal Communications (Online Content) Regulations as amended in 2020 and 2025 still require licensing for online media service providers and grant the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority (TCRA) broad powers to suspend or revoke licences. Vague provisions in the Cybercrimes Act and related laws also continue to criminalise legitimate expression, creating a chilling effect for journalists, bloggers, activists, and ordinary users.

According to the CIPESA, PALU and JamiiAfrica report, several incidents have narrowed the environment for the exercise of online freedoms.  Key media and engagement platforms such as the Clubhouse, X (formerly Twitter) and JamiiForums were blocked in 2023 and 2025 respectively. In 2024, Tanzania’s media space was marked by intensified restrictions.  TCRA suspended Mwananchi Communications’ online platforms for 30 days on October 2, 2024, against a backdrop of broader restrictions on unregistered Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) in October 2023.

Particularly concerning were the restrictions imposed during the 2025 general elections. The report notes that Tanzania implemented a nationwide internet shutdown from October 29 to November 3, 2025, cutting off access to major social media and communication platforms. This disrupted the ability of citizens, journalists, and observers to share information, document events, and participate in public debate during a critical democratic moment.

While Tanzania in 2022 enacted the Personal Data Protection Act, which came into force in 2023, its implementation is weakened by restrictions on anonymity and VPN usage, as well as heightened surveillance. Pronouncements by government officials against sharing certain election-related content have fostered fear and self-censorship. For many Tanzanians, especially critics of government and civic actors, legal protections for personal data remain undermined by surveillance-related risks.

The submission also draws attention to the growing threat of Technology-Facilitated Gender-based Violence (TFGBV). Women journalists, politicians, activists, and other public-facing women are increasingly subjected to online harassment, sexualised abuse, doxxing, reputational attacks, and coordinated trolling. These harms were particularly acute around the 2025 elections, when gendered disinformation and intimidation converged with broader restrictions on online speech.

To address these concerns, the report recommends that Tanzania repeals or amends vague and overly broad laws including the Cybercrimes Act and the Online Content Regulations. The report calls for compliance with international human rights standards, discouraging restrictions such as internet shutdowns and platform blocking. It also calls for judicial oversight over surveillance, greater transparency in state requests to technology companies, stronger support for the Personal Data Protection Commission, investment in digital rights literacy, and explicit protections against TFGBV.

Read the full report submission here.

1 2 3 … 39