Where Digital Rights and Economic Freedom Intersect

By Anna Kompanek |

The internet is the lifeblood of a modern economy. From a tech company bringing innovative solutions to the market, to a farmer using his mobile phone to check current crop prices and receive payments, connectivity has become key to unlocking economic opportunity. Building affordable infrastructure remains a challenge in many places. But connectivity now raises an equally daunting question: how to keep that access both available and rights-preserving.

New challenge of the internet era

At the 2026 Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa (FIFAfrica), co-hosted in Mauritius by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) and Halley Movement, Executive Director Dr. Wairagala Wakabi described a shift: when the Forum began in 2014, connectivity was the leading challenge. Today, the questions concern not just getting online but data privacy, governance, and the risks of being online. In Africa and beyond, the key issue is how that vital access can be denied by actors ranging from authoritarian governments to hackers – and, increasingly, bots or misused agentic artificial intelligence (AI).

On the government side, internet shutdowns and throttling remain a persistent reality in many places. While they are often seen through the perspective of suppressing human rights, there is an important economic dimension as well. When an internet disruption stops a merchant from advertising her goods, a small exporter from contacting buyers, or a chamber of commerce from reaching its members, digital repression becomes an economic issue. The question is no longer just how to connect entrepreneurs to the digital economy, but how to keep them connected when that access becomes fragile or politically contested.

I came to this year’s FIFAfrica to explore how emerging technologies can help digital rights advocates and local businesses defend their shared online space. As in past years, the Forum brought together an impressive group of open internet advocates, researchers, technologists, and policymakers. My main practical lesson: tools that help civil society operate under pressure might also protect local businesses and their independent associations.

When efficiency can become dependency

CIPESA’s State of Internet Freedom in Africa 2026 report examines digital public infrastructure (DPI) across 11 countries, focusing on identity, payment, and data sharing systems. Such systems can lower transaction costs, widen inclusion, and improve public services, but weak safeguards can entrench exclusion and enable intrusive surveillance. As the report explains, their shared dependence on connectivity means a cable cut, power failure, cloud outage, or internet disruption can interrupt identity, payments, and public services, affecting both socio-economic and civil-political rights.

The response – like with all new technologies – is not to reject DPI advancement, but to demand transparency, data protection, due process, accessible appeals, and practical alternatives.

Tools from the digital rights’ front lines

This year, FIFAfrica’s Digital Reality Walk showcased tools relevant to civil society and local businesses, including OONI Probe, Orbot, Tor Browser, and Butter Box. Custom VPNs offer another promising application. Bitcoin and other decentralised payment arrangements, while not without their own risks, have helped civil society groups retain channels for funding when conventional banking is constrained. Such tools empower users to monitor internet restrictions, anonymise mobile traffic, browse the web securely, share digital resources offline, use private encryption servers, and retain financial freedom. These civil society applications may also help businesses in challenging environments.

What businesses are already doing

Local businesses, chambers of commerce, and business associations around the world have a direct stake in privacy, free expression, and an open digital economy. This business case for digital rights, as outlined by the Center for International Private Enterprise, provides a foundation for connecting digital rights advocacy to economic opportunity.

Leading business organisations are also paying attention to these issues. The International Chamber of Commerce advances the digital economy agenda through its Digital Standards Initiative (DSI), which promotes a globally harmonised digital trade environment; its Global Digital Economy Commission, which advocates trustworthy, risk-based AI governance and responsible cross-border data flows; and its cybersecurity and internet governance positions, which emphasise security without excessive fragmentation or restrictions on legitimate use.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also supports an open and competitive digital economy. Its U.S.-Africa Business Center’s Digital Economy Task Force has championed affordable connectivity, enabling regulations, cross-border data flows, and digital entrepreneurship; Africa Digital Innovation Competition has supported African startups developing solutions in fintech, cybersecurity, and digital supply chains; and Global Connect initiative advocates against forced data localisation and other restrictions that fragment digital markets, while promoting privacy, cybersecurity, and sound regulation of emerging technologies.

These initiatives demonstrate the business community’s recognition that digital openness underpins economic opportunity. They focus on trade regulatory ecosystems that promote competitive markets and innovation rather than digital rights explicitly. Yet, they reinforce the same principle: businesses, like civil society, need open, dependable, secure digital systems governed by predictable rules.

A shared economic freedom agenda

In November, global business leaders will gather in Washington, DC for the B20 Summit where digital transformation will feature prominently. An equally important question is what happens when technologies that connect businesses to customers, finance, and global markets become instruments of surveillance, censorship, or economic control.

The B20’s focus on innovation, trusted digital systems, small business participation, and resilient supply chains offers an opening. Businesses need more than reduced economic barriers and better digital infrastructure: they must be able to communicate securely, access information, receive payments, and organise independently.

Digital rights defenders have spent years developing technologies to preserve these freedoms under pressure. Entrepreneurs in challenging environments can learn from them to defend the basic capacity of businesses to communicate, associate, access markets, and transact.

My main takeaway from FIFAfrica is that economic freedom and internet freedom are inseparable. Digital freedom organisations bring experience operating under pressure; chambers and business associations bring knowledge of members’ operational needs and the economic costs of politically motivated restrictions. Connecting their advocacy and resilience strategies could particularly benefit smaller businesses and independent local associations facing similar challenges as civil society organisations.

Anna Kompaneck is an International Development Consultant.

Kenya’s 2027 Elections Will Test Its Commitment to Digital and Media Rights

By Raylenne Kambua |

As Kenya approaches its August 2027 general elections, there are growing concerns about how the country’s digital and media laws and practices could affect citizens’ ability to meaningfully participate in the electoral process.

Over the last few years, Kenya has passed or amended several laws, such as the Kenya Information and Communications Act (KICA) and the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act (CMCA), which directly impact citizens’ online participation in civic and democratic processes. The Media Council of Kenya (MCK) has flagged more than 20 pieces of legislation that contain retrogressive provisions that threaten journalists’ right to report, their privacy, and citizens’ access to information.

As in many other African countries, digital technologies, including social media platforms and Artificial Intelligence (AI), have become central to citizens’ social, economic and political participation, particularly during periods of contestation, such as elections and protests.

During the 2024 Gen Z protests, young Kenyans used AI and other digital tools to simplify legislation and produce mobilisation materials, and used social media platforms to coordinate protests. The state responded with digital repression, including online threats, unwarranted arrests, abductions, internet disruptions, and unlawful surveillance. The 2027 campaigns will run on the same digital infrastructure, with more AI capabilities and with human rights at stake.

Digital Threats as Electoral Threats

On October 6, 2026, the Collaboration of International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) attended a stakeholder engagement hosted by the National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC) in Nairobi, where the Roadmap to a Violence-Free 2027 General Election report was launched.

The report identified the weaponisation of AI and technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) as key threats to peaceful elections. It also found that social media is where election violence is seeded, incubated, and mobilised, and called for digital hygiene and responsible use of digital media.

In an earlier engagement with the commission, CIPESA asserted that no single institution can address digital threats alone. Clear inter-institutional protocols can, however, enable timely, coordinated and rights-respecting responses, while strengthening the accountability of digital platforms.

Digital tools and AI were used in the 2022 general elections, and their use has since grown. As these tools become more sophisticated, real and fabricated content becomes harder to distinguish, increasing the risk of harm during elections.

CIPESA’s report, Navigating the Implications of AI on Digital Democracy in Kenya, finds that AI is reshaping digital participation and access to information in the country. However, the report warns that the existing AI governance gaps, rise of AI-powered political advertising, deepfakes, and microtargeting threaten to distort democratic processes and the information ecosystem in profound ways.

Internet and platform shutdowns also contribute to the information disorder and threaten electoral integrity. Election periods carry a heightened risk of internet shutdowns, which can limit voters’ access to information, silence observers and journalists, and leave rumours unchallenged.

There is the fear that Kenya could borrow the shutdown script from neighbours such as Uganda and Tanzania during next year’s elections. The country has already seen the warning signs. Telegram is often blocked during national examinations, and internet disruptions were reported during the 2024 Gen Z protests. In response, stakeholders secured interim orders restraining the government and mobile operators from shutting down internet access. Although the orders are temporary, the final ruling and the commitment of regulators and telecom operators will determine whether Kenyans stay connected during the August 2027 elections.

Press Freedom Under Threat

Private media houses lead in listenership and viewership, and mainstream media remains more trusted than social media as a source of information. Yet these outlets face threats to press freedom and state interference, while journalists encounter harassment. Media stakeholders have condemned these trends ahead of the elections.

Defamation is also a growing concern, and courts have been faulted for awarding serious damages against bloggers and the media, even though international standards hold that public officials should be open to greater scrutiny. Fear of legal consequences can force investigative journalists to slow down, undermining the public’s right to know.

Law as the Main Instrument of Control

Participants at a multi-stakeholder dialogue on ‘Advocacy Strategies for Better Tech and Media Policies’, hosted by KICTANet and the Bloggers Association of Kenya on October 8, 2026, in Nairobi, named vague legislation as one of the most persistent threats to online expression.

Laws such as the CMCA illustrate this pattern. Enacted in 2018, the Act criminalises certain forms of online expression, including false publications. In March 2026, the Court of Appeal struck down two sections of the 2025 Amendment Act for failing the test of constitutional clarity. The ruling prompted Parliament to appeal. The court left the Act’s investigative powers largely intact, while cautioning that courts must act as gatekeepers because those powers can be abused.

Following the court ruling, further amendments to the CMCA introduced new powers for the National Computer and Cybercrimes Coordination Committee (NC4), including the authority to order the blocking or removal of websites, pages and applications without a court order. In July 2026, the High Court declared two of the new provisions unconstitutional, as the amendments could risk criminalising legitimate speech.

The pattern is consistent: Parliament passes broad provisions, civil society challenges them in court, and courts later narrow their scope or strike them down. Some earlier cases followed a similar course. In 2014, a court rejected an attempt to restrict journalists and bloggers from publishing terror-related content without permission from the national police, holding that laws limiting fundamental rights do not enjoy the usual presumption of constitutionality. In another case, the High Court found the KICA offence of “misusing a telecommunication device” unconstitutionally vague. The court held that any limit on expression must be clear, pursue a legitimate aim, and be necessary and proportionate.

The laws used to restrict expression also evolve. The Prevention of Terrorism Act has been used against protesters, and authorities have invoked the CMCA to arrest online critics, some of whom were first abducted. During the 2027 electoral cycle, advocates should watch for existing legal provisions being used in new ways.

Civil society has also shown that early engagement can influence legislation. For instance, it persuaded Parliament to withdraw a proposed KICA amendment on the liability of social media administrators. This calls for proactiveness in policy development processes, ensuring bills are monitored throughout the stages rather than waiting until they have been passed.

Recommendations

  1. Parliament should publish bills early, allow meaningful public participation, and ensure that restrictions on online expression and access to information are clearly defined and consistent with constitutional rights.
  2. The Director of Public Prosecutions and the police should refrain from pursuing arbitrary and politically motivated prosecutions, and from misusing or selectively enforcing laws to prosecute protesters, social media users, bloggers and journalists.
  3. Courts should apply strict scrutiny to search, seizure and surveillance orders, and keep interim protections against internet disruption.
  4. The Communications Authority and telecom operators should commit publicly not to shut down or throttle the internet and publish transparency reports on government takedown requests.
  5. The NCIC, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), the judiciary, and the MCK should agree on protocols for responding to digital threats during the elections, with clear roles for each.
  6. Media houses should adopt the MCK election guideline and AI code of conduct, invest in verification and deepfake detection, and strengthen legal support for their journalists.
  7. Digital platforms should expand election integrity and moderation capacity for Kenya, respond promptly to TFGBV and hate speech reports, clearly label AI-generated or manipulated political content, and publish transparency reports on government requests to remove or restrict content.
  8. Civil society should track bills at the policy stage through a shared system and pool legal analysis.
  9. Development partners should fund legal defence for bloggers and journalists, and support strategic litigation, because cases like the CMCA challenge take years to resolve.

CIPESA at the 7th Annual National Forum on Business and Human Rights

By Update |

CIPESA is pleased to participate in the 7th Annual National Forum on Business and Human Rights organised by the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development alongside participating partners like FIDA Uganda, Enabel in Uganda, etc., under the theme “Reflecting on the Progress and Strengthening Commitment: The journey of Uganda’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights”.

The forum provides an important platform for stakeholders to engage on business responsibility, human rights protection, and accountability. As digital technologies continue to shape business operations and everyday life, discussions on responsible technology use, digital rights, data protection, and corporate accountability remain vital.

Date: October 26-28, Location: Kampala, Uganda

Share your thoughts with us @cipesaug and engage using #BeeraSharp

Strengthening Digital Rights for Persons with Disabilities and Older Persons

By Tsion Meingstu and Paul Kimumwe |

As part of efforts to strengthen the integration of digital inclusion and digital accessibility for persons with disabilities and older persons into its human rights monitoring and oversight mandate, the Ethiopia Human Rights Commission (EHRC) held a two-day capacity-building workshop for its staff on September 21st and 22nd, 2026.

The workshop, which was facilitated by experts from the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), sought to equip participants with foundational knowledge and skills in digital accessibility and inclusion, how to design and implement monitoring checklists for the digital rights of persons with disabilities and older persons, and how to communicate and advocate for the digital rights of persons with disabilities and older persons.

The staff capacity building workshop was one of the Commission’s key deliverables under a ten-month grant from CIPESA’s Africa Digital Rights Fund (ADRF). Other activities under the grant include monitoring and assessing the impact of digital technologies’ (in)accessibility on the daily lives of older persons and persons with disabilities, and organising advocacy activities to raise awareness of digital rights for persons with disabilities and older persons among relevant government and non-government stakeholders to foster inclusive practices.

During the workshop, Shimels Ashagre, Senior Human Rights Officer for Disability Rights and Rights of Older Persons at the EHRC, presented a draft monitoring toolkit developed as part of the grant that will be used to assess the state of digital inclusion for persons with disabilities and older persons in Ethiopia.

The toolkit is organised around eight key dimensions of digital inclusion, with specific questions tailored to both persons with disabilities and older persons. It draws on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the UN Principles for Older Persons, the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing (MIPAA), the African Union Protocol on the Rights of Older Persons, and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 3.0).

The Commission will use the findings from the assessment to inform the design and implementation of advocacy activities about the digital rights of persons with disabilities and older persons.

Opening the workshop, the thematic Commissioner for Disability Rights and Rights of Older Persons, Mohammed Ahmed, emphasised that the world is undergoing rapid digital transformation, with technology increasingly shaping how people access information, services, and opportunities. While these advancements bring significant benefits, they also raise important human rights considerations that must not be overlooked.

He stressed that particular attention should be given to the rights of vulnerable groups, including persons with disabilities and older persons, who often face barriers to accessing and benefiting from digital technologies. Commissioner Mohammed underscored that digital inclusion and accessibility are not merely technical issues but fundamental human rights concerns that require deliberate action from governments, institutions, and other stakeholders.

Dr Wairagala Wakabi, the Executive Director of CIPESA, noted that digital inclusion for persons with disabilities and older persons has become a central thematic area for CIPESA, which is why it partners with institutions such as the EHRC to strengthen their capacity to monitor and promote digital inclusion. He noted that through the ADRF, CIPESA provides financial and technical support to organisations that are championing digital inclusion.

For example, in the last round of the ADRF grant, USD 320,000 was awarded to 18 initiatives in 14 countries to support efforts to advance digital rights, inclusion, and online safety. Three of the recipients, including Ethiopia’s Human Rights Commission, the Zimbabwe Council for the Blind, and the Rwanda-based Organisation d’Integration et de Promotion des Personnes Atteintes d’Albinisme (OIPPA), are focusing on Digital Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities and Older Persons.

Dr Wakabi noted that for effective advocacy around digital rights, participants need to understand how digital technologies intersect and affect the rights of persons with disabilities. And for Human Rights Commissions, this understanding helps them to integrate digital rights into their monitoring and oversight mandates of human rights.

Reactions from the participants:

“The training was very fascinating. I gained a tremendous amount of knowledge about digital rights and how they are directly related to human rights and their intersection. This was beginner-friendly training that provided participants with a foundational experience in the field.” Female participant

“Overall, the training was highly informative and educational. Prior to attending the training, I did not have a clear understanding of the concept of digital technologies and their practical applications. However, the training helped me develop a solid understanding of the subject and enhanced my knowledge of key digital concepts.” Male participant

The sessions on digital rights, as well as the rights of older persons and persons with disabilities, significantly broadened my perspective and enhanced my understanding of inclusion and accessibility from a digital technologies’ perspective. The knowledge gained has provided me with a clear framework for integrating these concepts into my future work, particularly on emerging issues related to the rights and participation of older persons and persons with disabilities.

Additionally, the training focus on Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV) offered valuable and thought-provoking insights into an important and evolving area. Overall, the training was highly informative, practical, and relevant to my professional responsibilities.”

The training was attended by 18 individuals (10 men and 8 women) drawn from various departments of the commission, including the Disability Rights and Rights of Older Persons Department, Human Rights Education Department, Women and Children’s Rights Department, Office of the Chief Commissioner, Monitoring and Investigation Department, and the Refugees, Internally Displaced Persons, and Migrants’ Rights Department.

CIPESA at the KTA Annual Africa Technology and Intellectual Property Symposium 2026

By Update |

The annual gathering brings together legal practitioners, policymakers, technology innovators, and industry leaders to shape the legal and policy frameworks driving Uganda’s next decade of economic transformation. Jointly convened by KTA Advocates, the Centre for Law, Policy and Innovation Initiative (CeLPII), and the Uganda Law Society. The summit is taking place from October 22–23, 2026, in Kampala, Uganda.

Share your thoughts @cipesaug.

Click here to access the event details.