Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Tag Archives: Internet Freedom

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Internet Freedom
07Nov

The Four Pillars Shaping The Trajectory of AI in Africa

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Juliet Nanfuka |

Mainstream narratives often frame Africa’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) rollout in Africa as a technological challenge. However, four key pillars are informing the trajectory of AI in Africa, and in so doing, are laying bare a chasm that influences the broader digital ecosystem, including access, development, civic participation, and digital democracy. These pillars are a country’s democratic credentials, economic gaps, legacy governance structures and fragmented regulation, and in-built influence in the design of AI that serves to exclude more than it serves to include users, particularly in Africa. 

According to the 2025 edition of the State of Internet Freedom in Africa report, political regimes and their associated democratic credentials have come to play a key role in the trajectory of AI in various African countries. Countries categorised as democratic, such as South Africa, Ghana, Namibia, and Senegal, have displayed the capacity to deploy AI aimed at improving governance, accountability, and accessibility. 

For example in South Africa, the South African Revenue Service (SARS) employs the Lwazi AI-powered assistant to streamline tax assessment processes, enhancing efficiency and reducing corruption.  In Kenya, the Sauti ya Bajeti (Voice of the Budget) platform uses AI to help citizens query and track public expenditure, empowering civic participation and fiscal accountability. Meanwhile, Ghana has been a standout innovator with Khaya, an open-source AI translator supporting local languages and easing communication barriers, as well as  DeafCanTalk, an app enabling real-time translation between sign language and spoken word. These apps have utilised AI to meet digital inclusion needs, and have  improved accessibility and communication within the country. 

In contrast, in more authoritarian regimes like Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Rwanda, AI runs the risk of becoming another tool used by the state to entrench digital authoritarianism and restrict civic freedoms. These countries also rank as weak performers on the Freedom in the World Report, such as Cameroon, which scored 15 points, followed by Egypt (18), Ethiopia (18), and Rwanda (21), which rate as Not Free. Regarding internet freedom, a similar pattern emerges with Egypt scoring 28 points out of 100, followed by Ethiopia (27) and Rwanda (36), leading to a Not Free ranking.

Examples of the problematic use of AI include the case of Rwanda, where pro-government propagandists used Large Language Models (LLMs) to mass-produce synthetic online messages that mimic grassroots support while suppressing dissent. Although Rwanda has also introduced AI in judicial and border management systems, these technologies have dual-use potential which blur the line between governance and surveillance.

A second pillar that influences the trajectory of AI in African countries is economic and infrastructural inequality. Countries with stronger infrastructure, higher Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, higher internet penetration levels, and better Human Development Index (HDI) scores have proven more likely to shape AI development. These include countries such as South Africa, Tunisia and Egypt. Countries with weaker digital infrastructure, limited data networks and high connectivity costs, face the risk of being left behind or becoming dependent on external technologies.

Africa still has a small share of global data centres and accounts for only 1% of global compute capacity, making it hard to train, fine-tune, or evaluate models locally and cheaply.

This power imbalance has resulted in a two-tier continent which is seeing parts of the continent progressively adopt, integrate AI and also benefit from AI infrastructure investment, while parts of the continent remain lagging and reliant on adopted systems that may not be responsive to their intended uses in different contexts. Albeit, the bulk of the continent remains a consumer of AI and largely dependent on external funding to build its AI infrastructure.

Examples of private sector entities making significant investments in the African AI industry include Microsoft and G42 which in 2024, launched a USD 1 billion initiative to develop a sustainable AI data centre in Kenya. In September 2025, Airtel commenced construction of its 44 MW sustainable data centre in Kenya, which is expected to be the largest in East Africa, once completed in 2027. Earlier this year, in March, Microsoft announced a USD 297 million investment to expand its cloud and AI systems in the country. Meanwhile, Google is also funding the South African Centre for Artificial Intelligence Research (CAIR) for infrastructure and expertise to strengthen local AI capacity.  In October 2025, Rwanda received a USD 17.5 million investment from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to establish the Rwanda AI Scaling Hub, an initiative designed to drive AI innovation across various sectors, including health, agriculture, and education.

A third pillar which also has direct consequences for democracy, is the fact that AI governance has an entrenched power imbalance which favours the state. In many countries, particularly those with weaker democratic credentials, civil society, media and private actors are often sidelined. The report notes that despite AI’s swift evolution, across 14 countries (Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe) studied, none have developed a comprehensive AI-specific legislation yet resulting in the reliance on existing and fragmented legal frameworks that do not adequately regulate or address complex AI concerns.

The leading countries have developed guidelines, AI policies and strategies, data protection laws, and applied sector legislation to AI governance. In contrast, the lagging countries generally lack this foundational framework, creating a vacuum which could heighten AI-driven risks in the absence of effective oversight. Rwanda was among the first countries to adopt a national AI policy in 2023.  Since then, various other countries, including Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, and Tunisia, have either launched national AI strategies or have been developing foundational policy frameworks over the last two years. 

However, in some instances, these policy processes, when they exist, often occur behind closed doors, without meaningful multi-stakeholder participation. In many instances, economic growth objectives dominate national AI strategies, while digital rights, transparency and accountability are sidelined. 

The fourth pillar pertains to AI as an instrument of inequality and social fracturing. The spread of deepfakes, AI-generated misinformation and algorithmic exclusion have become a real threat to political participation and access. This has played out on several occasions and is present in all countries despite their democratic credentials such as in the 2024 elections and protests in Kenya. In Namibia and South Africa, AI-driven campaigns are believed to have influenced perceptions of legitimacy and outcome.

For the myriad of languages that exist on the continent. Only a handful are factored in the machinery of AI. This has seen low-resource languages get lost in the digital ecosystem, content moderation is designed for Western norms as a result of the languages used in the training of AI, and many users in the continent do not have the savvy or skills to challenge these systems. This has resulted in an algorithmic second-class citizenship which is seeing AI bypass the needs of users in Africa, including the resources required to enable adequate civic engagement, transparency and accountability. 

Through these four pillars, the State of Internet Freedom in Africa 2025 highlights that AI design, deployment, and impact are ultimately reflections of the power structures that define it globally. This power imbalance plays out within the continent at the national level where decision making on AI’s trajectory remains largely confined.

The report calls for a human-centred AI governance in Africa, through deliberate and inclusive approaches. Find the full report here

03Nov

Can African Commission Resolution 580 Stem Rising Tide of Internet Shutdowns?

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Edrine Wanyama |

In March 2024, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights passed a resolution that calls on states to desist from shutting down the internet during elections. Yet, that same year registered a spiral in internet disruptions, and 2025 has similarly seen several countries disrupt digital networks. This begs the question: Can this resolution actually be leveraged to stem the tide of network disruptions on the continent?

The Resolution on Internet Shutdowns and Elections in Africa – ACHPR.Res.580 (LXXVIII) urges states to ensure unrestricted access to the internet before, during and after elections. This, it states, is in line with protecting freedom of expression and access to information, which are guaranteed by article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right. 

Last year, the number of internet disruptions in Africa rose to 21, up from 17 in 2023, according to figures by the KeepItOn coalition. In 2025, a number of countries holding elections have imposed disruptions, and shutdowns. Tanzania, Cameroon are the latest addition to electoral related disruptions while Sudan over examinations and Libya over public protests in the same year implemented internet disruptions. 

The Resolution among others calls for state parties’ compliance with the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Good Governance and other regional and international human rights instruments. It also calls for open and secure and while also sounds the call for telecommunications and internet service providers to inform users of potential disruptions and exercise due diligence to resolve any disruptions expeditiously.

Eight years ago, Resolution on the Right to Freedom of Information and Expression on the Internet in Africa – ACHPR/Res.362(LIX)2016 was passed which urged States Parties to not only respect but also to “take legislative and other measures to guarantee, respect and protect citizen’s right to freedom of information and expression through access to Internet services.”

However, to date, neither of these Resolutions appear to have an impact on the path that access to information nor freedom from internet shutdowns have taken in Africa. The spaces to exercise digital democracy remain shrinking as do the spaces for citizens to assert their rights for government transparency and accountability.

The latest mis-happenings have been recorded in the October 2025 election in  Cameroon which bore witness to  internet disruption.. Within the same month, Tanzania imposed internet disruptions similarly blocking access across the country. 

Conversely, these disruptions are implemented despite constant calls from civic actors from the local and international community on governments of Tanzania and Cameroon to desist from internet disruptions due to the associated dangers including erosion of public trust in the electoral process and undermining credibility of elections, cutting off expression, access to information and documentation of human rights violations. 

Trends by African governments in total disregard of the efforts and calls by the Commission lie squarely on often applied broad and ambiguously fronted justifications of managing disinformation and maintaining public order.

Internet shutdowns and disruptions are a tool for controlling or limiting electoral narratives, suppressing the gathering and flow of evidence and information by key actors such as journalists, citizens and election observers.

Electoral processes including voter turn-up, electoral malpractices, intimidation, human rights violation, and brutality of governments and their agencies often go hidden and unnoticed. Internet shutdowns and disruptions constitute a tool for demobilising opposition actors by curtailing coordination, vote counting and the opportunity to mobilise, assemble and associate. 

As other countries including Côte d’Ivoire, Central African Republic, Guinea-Bissau, Namibia, Guinea-Bissau, gear up for elections in the remainder of year, and in 2026 including Cape Verde, Benin, Republic of the Congo, Morocco, Gambia, Ethiopia, Djibouti, São Tomé and Principe, South Sudan, Uganda and Zambia, fears of mirroring actions are more intense than ever. 

Without clear punitive measures and enforcement mechanisms, the Commission’s resolutions continue to suffer impunity actions which potentially dominate curtailment of the democratic landscape that further exacerbate economic losses, cripple businesses, stifle innovation, and human rights violations. 

The continued undermining of the Resolutions that emerge from the Commission on democracy and an open internet during elections requires joint and collaborative actions by both the state and non-state actors to give them the legal effect they deserve. 

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) hence calls on stakeholders including:

  • Civil society organisations, human rights defenders, and legal practitioners to proactively pursue strategic litigation in both national and regional courts to secure strategies, actions and measures that push States parties into compliance with the regional human rights instruments.
  • The African Union political organs such as the peace and Security Council (AUPSC) and the election observation missions to adopt and integrate internet freedoms in the undertakings as a key security and governance tool. 
  • Establish legal harbours that protect telecommunications companies and internet service providers from the overreach powers of governments that often rely on overly broad laws to order internet shutdowns especially in election periods. 
30Oct

Tanzania’s Internet Disruption Undermines Electoral Integrity and Imperils Livelihoods

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Staff | 

The ongoing internet disruption in Tanzania is gravely undermining the integrity of the country’s general elections and jeopardising livelihoods. With citizens unable to access credible and diverse information, the blackout not only erodes public trust but also risks intensifying ongoing demonstrations. It further prevents citizens, journalists, and civil society actors from documenting human rights violations committed by security agencies and other actors.

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) expresses solidarity with the people of Tanzania and joins the local and international community in urging the Government of Tanzania to immediately and fully restore internet access and to refrain from any form of network disruption.

CIPESA has joined numerous international organisations in calling on Tanzania’s Ministry of Communication and Information Technology to uphold digital rights and to keep the internet on before, during, and after the elections.

CIPESA also supports the #KeepItOn coalition which is a global network of more than 345 organisations across 106 countries working to end internet shutdowns in its appeal to President Dr. Samia Suluhu Hassan to publicly commit to ensuring that all people in Tanzania have unrestricted access to the internet, digital platforms, and communication channels throughout the electoral period.

In addition, CIPESA has joined the Net Rights Coalition, a network of internet freedom advocates working to share knowledge and combat digital rights threats, in calling on the Government of Tanzania to respect and promote digital rights.

These calls come against a backdrop of declining digital freedoms in Tanzania, marked by increasing restrictions on online expression, threats to media independence, and a shrinking civic space. Restoring full internet access is not only a democratic imperative. It is essential for protecting human rights, fostering transparency, and ensuring that citizens can freely participate in shaping their country’s future.

CIPESA’s efforts are in line with the principles of the African Declaration on Digital Freedom and Democracy that emphasises digital democracy as a cornerstone of open, inclusive, and rights-respecting societies.

24Oct

Why African Languages and Knowledge Systems Matter in Online Governance

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Juliet Nanfuka |

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

29Sep

The African Declaration on Digital Freedom and Democracy

Author CIPESA Posted on

FIFAfrica25 |

The African Declaration on Digital Freedom and Democracy (the declaration) was adopted in Windhoek, Namibia. Spearheaded by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), conveners of the annual Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa (FIFAfrica), this declaration is a collective statement of principles and commitments by a multi-stakeholder assembly of digital rights actors from across Africa and beyond. 

For decades, Namibia has demonstrated unmatched commitment to democratic governance, press freedom, and inclusive digital development.  It holds a unique and powerful legacy in the global media and information landscape, having been the birthplace of the 1991 Windhoek Declaration on Promoting Independent and Pluralistic Media and the Windhoek+30 Declaration of 2021, which expanded the 1991 Windhoek principles to the digital age and reaffirmed that information is a public good.

In the digital age, where emerging challenges such as information integrity, Artificial Intelligence (AI) governance, connectivity gaps, and platform accountability continue to shape our societies, the hosting of FIFAfrica and the unveiling of the African Declaration on Digital Freedom and Democracy in Namibia mark a historic milestone for the digital rights movement across the continent.

This Declaration reaffirms our collective commitment to advancing digital democracy as a cornerstone of open, inclusive, and rights-respecting societies. It reflects our shared readiness to champion access to information, information integrity, data governance, online safety, and digital resilience.

These principles are not just aspirations—they are fundamental tenets of modern democracy. As Africa navigates the complexities of the digital era, this Declaration serves as a guiding framework to ensure that technology empowers rather than excludes, protects rather than exploits, and strengthens rather than undermines democratic values. For us, internet freedom is freedom from digitally-enabled oppression and exploitation, and freedom for shaping technology to serve the full development of Africa’s people and environment.

Preamble

We, the undersigned participants of FIFAfrica25, representing civil society, the tech community, media, the business sector, and individuals across Africa:

Confronted by the reality that nearly half of African citizens still do not have access to the internet and that this digital divide excludes them from exercising any of their rights online;

Guided by the reality that digital technologies now shape and inform nearly every aspect of the human experience, from civic participation and economic opportunity to education, health, and justice;

Recognising that while technological advancement presents extraordinary opportunities to enhance the protection of human rights, it also poses grave risks to democratic participation, social justice, and freedoms across Africa;

Acknowledging that Africa, as the youngest continent rich in cultures, languages, social fabrics, and economic potential, is nonetheless confronted with worrying democratic regression and the misuse of digital technologies that deepen exclusion and exacerbate harms, as well as unequal standards by international tech companies in terms of human rights protection and promotion in our countries;

Affirming that at the intersection of democracy, society, and digital technology lies the opportunity for Africans to transform and harness technology as an enabler of improved services and the enjoyment of human rights for all;

Reaffirming the importance of existing continental declarations and frameworks such as the African Declaration on Internet Rights and Freedoms, the M20 Declaration on Information Integrity for the public good, the Model Law on Access to Information, the African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection, the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa and the recent digital resolutions 620, 630, 631 and 639 at  the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR);

Guided by complementary frameworks including the African Union Digital Transformation Strategy (2020–2030), the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) Digital Trade Protocol, and the AU Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy, which collectively signal Africa’s determination to build a progressive, inclusive, and rights-respecting digital democracy;

Committed to ensuring that technology serves as a tool of empowerment and inclusion rather than exclusion, placing Africa’s citizens at the heart of digital democracy while upholding the necessary safeguards for fundamental freedoms;

Recognising that as technology continues to evolve at an unprecedented pace, deliberate action is required to ensure that its commercial drivers and related architectures are shaped to strengthen rather than undermine democratic values;

Affirm through this Digital Democracy Declaration for Africa, our shared vision of a continent where technology advances human rights, safeguards freedoms, and strengthens inclusive democratic participation.

Determined to defend and advance the rights, freedoms, and security of all Africans in the digital era;

Do hereby adopt this Declaration on Digital Freedom and Democracy.

Our Principles

  1. Universal Access, Meaningful Inclusion:
    1. Every African has the right to affordable, safe, and meaningful access to the internet, regardless of gender, age, location, ability, language, or socio-economic status.
    2. Internet shutdowns should never be implemented as tools of control. All forms of network disruptions must be stopped and digital inclusion prioritised to bridge digital divides.
    3. Digital spaces must be protected as arenas for free expression, access to information, peaceful assembly, and association, and spaces where privacy is respected, thus enabling citizens to engage without fear of censorship, intimidation or reprisal. A democratic Africa is one where citizens can confidently challenge power online and offline.
    4. Political participation online must reflect the diversity of Africa’s peoples, ensuring gender equality, youth participation, and the inclusion of historically marginalised groups.
  1. Transparency, Oversight and Accountability:
    • Governments and private actors must be transparent about how digital technologies are designed, deployed, and governed. Accountability mechanisms must protect and enhance the rights of citizens. Independent oversight and accountability mechanisms that protect citizens from unchecked surveillance, manipulation, and digital repression should be established and operationalised.
  2. People-centred Digital Transformation:
    • Digital systems must be designed to serve people first. Every innovation must advance human dignity, agency, and rights. We reiterate that Africa’s digital future cannot be built on systems that surveil, exclude, or exploit people and citizens.
    • The digital divide structures access to information and impacts people differently. It is critical that the needs of marginalised groups, whether by urban rural sex or age, are specifically addressed in efforts to ensure technology is people-centred.
    • Governments must develop people-centered laws and policies that promote affordable, secure, and universal internet access supported by inclusive ICT infrastructure developed through public-private partnerships.
    • Accountability of digital operators is needed to ensure public interest prerogatives are respected, and this requires multistakeholder engagement and independent regulatory and governance processes.
  3. Electoral and Political Rights:
    • Electoral processes in both online and offline respects must be transparent, independently monitored, and guided by impartial institutions to promote and enhance accountability
    • Voters must be guaranteed safety before, during, and after elections, including protection from physical violence, digital harassment, and state repression.
    • Political participation is not limited to elections—it encompasses civic engagement, peaceful assembly, association, access to information and free expression both online and offline.
    • Civic engagement and digital participation must be protected as pillars of accountability.
    • Misinformation and disinformation, along with hate speech, affect information integrity during elections, thereby putting election integrity into question. Any measures to address information integrity must comply with international human rights law.
  4. Civil Liberties:
    • The rule of law must protect political dissent and freedom of expression online and offline.
    • Practices that undermine democracy, including undue and unwarranted surveillance, censorship, cyberattacks and the criminalisation of speech including imprisonment, harassment, or physical violence targeting dissenters should be stopped.
  • Data Justice:
    • Data can be an enabler or disabler of human rights. It must be governed with justice, sovereignty, equity, and ethics at its core. Privacy, informed and active agency over consent and accountability are non-negotiable. Policies must protect individuals from targeted exploitation and abuse by states and corporations, while upholding data sovereignty and ensuring the use of this asset for the benefit of all.
    • Regional economic blocs must commit to harmonising digital rights frameworks across member states, reducing fragmentation and ensuring continent-wide protection of freedoms.
    • Data holders in both public and private sectors should be subject to transparent and open. access regimes that are guided by public interest criteria, with only narrowly framed exceptions that accord with international standards of legality, legitimate purpose, necessity and proportionality rationales for refusing disclosure.
  • Digital Resilience and Security
    • Societies must be protected from digital harms such as disinformation, cyberattacks, and tech-facilitated violence against women and vulnerable communities, which are used to violate the rights to expression, equality, privacy and dignity of these persons. The responsibility for protection should not be the sole burden of individuals.
    • Protection must be through rights-respecting safeguards without compromising  fundamental freedoms.  Safeguards must strengthen trust, protect electoral cycle processes, defend the media, public protest, and secure online communities while fully upholding rights.
    • Resilience requires African stakeholders to work collectively to empower internet users with critical agency about their right to a free, rights-respecting and open internet.
  • Innovation for Equity:
    • Emerging technologies and approaches, from artificial intelligence (AI) to digital public infrastructure, must be designed, developed, adopted and deployed to promote fairness, equity, sustainability, democracy and transparency, while safeguarding all individuals against bias, surveillance, and exploitation.
    • Governments, the private sector including the tech community and other stakeholders must  ensure these technologies advance shared prosperity rather than entrenching the power and interests of the privileged.
    • Incentives should be put in place for Africa-centric innovations, involving African data, rather than exclusive reliance on imported technology and services.
  • Universality of Rights
    • All people, regardless of who they are or where they live, must  enjoy equitable rights and freedoms. The right to access, use, and shape digital technologies is a direct extension of fundamental human rights.

Calls To Action

We, the undersigned further call upon governments, regional bodies, big tech and corporations, media, civil society, and citizens to commit to:

Governments

  • Protect democratic spaces online and offline, and to ensure that policies and laws uphold fundamental rights and freedoms.
  • Adhere to and domesticate progressive frameworks built upon public consultation efforts and embedding them into national digital strategies.
  • Reject network disruptions and refrain from using internet shutdowns, social media shutdowns or throttling as tools of information control, especially during times of public interest such as elections and protests.
  • Support the establishment of independent regulatory bodies, free from political interference, to ensure trust, safety, and accountability in digital governance.
  • Take deliberate measures, including sustained investment, public-private partnerships,and digital literacy initiatives, to expand affordable, reliable internet infrastructure and ensure meaningful access for marginalised and  underserved communities.
  • Invest in affordable and reliable internet infrastructure, and prioritize marginalized and underserved communities.
  • Introduce enabling regulation and financing for community-centred connectivity initiatives, public access, access in schools and universities and partnerships with the private sector and civil society.

Regional Bodies

  • Harmonise digital rights frameworks across member states to reduce fragmentation and protect freedoms continent-wide.
  • Actively monitor and publicly hold states accountable for digital rights violations such as shutdowns, surveillance overreach, and censorship, especially during elections.
  • Support democratic consolidation by monitoring elections, promoting digital rights, and ensuring states uphold their obligations under African and international frameworks.
  • Advance digital inclusion by prioritising cross-border connectivity and ensuring affordable access to information infrastructure.
  • Support pan-African approaches towards ensuring that foreign data holders provide access to African stakeholders at the highest standards where they do so in other parts of the world.

Big Tech and Corporations with digital and democratic significance

  • Respect and integrate African social and linguistic standards in platform design, data governance, and content moderation practices.
  • Increase transparency and measures around algorithms, data practices, and the handling of harmful content.
  • Invest in public interest media and digital literacy initiatives that counter disinformation and strengthen civic participation and engagement.
  • Partner with African institutions, including civil society, media, academia and tech hubs to support inclusive digital economies without reinforcing dependency or exploitation.

Civil Society

  • Champion the principles of digital democracy by holding governments and corporations accountable to transparency, fairness, and rights-based governance.
  • Strengthen cross-border coalitions to push back against practices such as internet shutdowns, unlawful surveillance, and exclusionary digital policies.
  • Amplify the voices of marginalised groups by ensuring that digital transformation agendas reflect the lived realities of all Africans.
  • Research and monitor online opportunities and threats to human rights in Africa, including the performance of platforms and AI services in these respects.

Citizens

  • Meaningfully and purposefully participate actively in digital spaces through exercising freedoms of expression, assembly, association and public engagements.
  • Demand accountability from leaders and tech companies over data collection, processing and management.
  • In promoting digital democracy, act ethically and accountably in terms of respect for human rightswhen using digital technologies, fact-check, and ensure that the digital rights of others are respected.

All stakeholders

  • Join the movement for #InternetFreedomAfrica by sharing experiences and advocating for meaningful, inclusive access to the internet in your community.

Media:

  • Act as watchdogs to raise awareness and monitor digital governance regimes, safeguard electoral integrity, amplify diverse voices, and counter disinformation that undermines democratic participation.

Do you want to endorse the declaration? Please complete this form to give a reaction or to add your name to the African Declaration on Digital Freedom and Democracy!

Our Call to Action

The African Declaration on Digital Freedom and Democracy is not a conclusion, but a continuous process that should operate in tandem with the evolving needs of society, democratic participation and technology.

We, the undersigned call upon individuals, communities, and institutions across Africa to support this declaration and undertake efforts to ensure that the underlying principles are protected, respected, and promoted by all stakeholders for an inclusive, improved and favourable civic space:

This Declaration is endorsed by the following organisations, the tech community, media, business sector and individuals:

  1. Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)
  2. AfricTivistes
  3. KICTANet
  4. Paradigm Initiative (PIN)
  5. Access Now
  6. NMT Media Foundation
  7. International Media Support
  8. South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef)
  9. Media Monitoring Africa

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 35