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
19Jan

Navigating The Aftermath of Uganda’s Internet Shutdown

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Juliet Nanfuka |

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

13Jan

Uganda’s Election and the Lingering Legacy of Internet Blockage

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Juliet Nanfuka |

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

29Dec

Dr. Rehema Baguma

Author CIPESA Posted on

Who is Dr. Rehema Baguma?

I am Rehema Baguma, currently working at Makerere University in Uganda, where I serve as an Associate Professor of Information Systems. My research interests include: Digital Inclusion, Data & AI Governance, EduTech & eGovernance. I have extensively researched and consulted in Uganda and neighbouring countries to make ICTs accessible to persons with Disabilities, among other areas. I have had the privilege of engaging in a series of industry initiatives in collaboration with government agencies, CSOs, international actors and DPOs. Notable among these include:

  • Development of ICT Accessibility and Disability Indicators-A framework for monitoring Obligatory National Implementation of ICT Accessibility for the Fulfilment of the Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities for the ICT Policy Centre for Eastern and Southern Africa (CIPESA), in 2018.
  • Leading a research study on the Audit of Inclusive ICTs for Education in Uganda, which established the extend to which ICTs used in education are accessible to Persons with Disabilities (May to September 2015).
  • Training of over 100 Government Web Administrators and Public Relations Officers (PROs) in Uganda in Web Accessibility in 2016.
  • Development of an Implementation Strategy of the Digital Talent Policy (DTP) for Persons with Disabilities in Rwanda (June 2017–January 2018).
  • Sensitisation and training of Policy Makers from Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies about ICTs used by Persons with Disabilities and Monitoring ICTs and Disability Policy in Uganda, in April 2018.
  • Member of the project on promoting the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Access to inclusive education and information in Uganda in partnership with UNESCO, UNICEF & National Union of Disabled Persons in Uganda (NUDIPU) between 2015 to 2017.
  • Contributor to the ICT for Inclusive Education policy for Uganda (draft)
  • Contributor to the National ICT for Disability policy for Uganda (draft)

My motivation came during my PhD research, which focused on Web accessibility through the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. I was led to the area by a senior staff member at my School at the time, who told me that ICT accessibility could be a good area to research. My PhD research was on “Making the Web accessible to Persons with Disabilities through the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines” which demonstrated that the guidance given in WCAG (the most comprehensive and widely used set of Web accessibility guidelines developed by W3C) is relevant to the Web accessibility problems faced by people with disabilities; that WCAG has a higher potential to influence the development of accessible Web based systems save for its usability limitations; and proposed a solution to the usability limitations of WCAG grounded in a broader mature field of information retrieval. After completing my PhD, I felt compelled to apply the results of my research in practice, which led to several collaborations and assignments within Uganda and abroad.

There is an increasing awareness and appreciation of the need for and possibilities of digital rights, as well as the inclusion of people with disabilities, through advocacy, training, development, and the implementation of digital rights/inclusive ICT policies. This also includes the development of more inclusive technologies and platforms. For example, in June 2025, the government of Kenya committed to making all its digitised public services accessible to persons with disabilities, in alignment with the Accessibility Standard for Digital Products.  Additionally, there is an increasing number of advocacy initiatives focused on digital inclusion for people with disabilities. For instance, the Global Accessibility Awareness Day (GAAD) has evolved into an advocacy platform for inclusive policy audits, innovation labs for assistive technologies, and training programs to build capacity for disability rights advocacy and technology development.

There is an increase in the development of AI-driven Assistive Technologies and Tools for persons with disabilities, including those customised for the African context. For example, Signvrse, a Kenyan startup, is developing AI-powered sign language translation toolsthat convert speech and text into visual representations of sign language. Additionally,there are several advocacy and capacity-building efforts in different parts of Africa, such as accessibility audits, innovation labs, and fellowship programs to support affordable, local assistive technologies, and train Activists to advance digital inclusion for Persons with Disabilities.

The key threats and challenges to the digital rights and inclusion of people with disabilities in Africa are gaps in policy implementation and enforcement, the high cost and inaccessibility of assistive technologies, and general infrastructure gaps. Most African countries have progressive laws and policies regarding disability and ICT access; however, these often remain on paper due to a lack of political will and weak enforcement mechanisms. For instance, a legal requirement for all TV stations to provide sign language interpretation is often ignored. Also, government websites and e-services, which are increasingly vital for accessing public services, are frequently not designed to be accessible to people with disabilities (e.g., lacking alt text for screen readers or video captions). Further, essential assistive devices and software (like screen readers, Braille displays, and speech input software) are often expensive and out of reach for most people with disabilities who are, on average, poorer than their mainstream counterparts.

Additionally, unreliable electricity, poor internet connectivity, and the high cost of mobile data in many rural and remote areas create fundamental barriers to access for disadvantaged groups like People with Disabilities. Additionally, AI systems, including those used in screening for admission to educational institutions and job recruitment, may amplify existing discrimination and perpetuate negative stereotypes if not designed with accessibility and inclusion in mind. Moreso, the continent-wide limited availability of reliable and disaggregated data on the challenges faced by different disability groups continues to negatively impact the design and implementation of targeted interventions and policies. 

Building trust, fostering strong partnerships, and promoting regional collaboration in Africa’s disability rights movement requires intentional structures, shared power, and sustained dialogue among governments and various stakeholders.  There is a need for a shared rights-based framework grounded in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and African human rights instruments. People with disabilities and their representative organisations must be decision-makers, not just consultees, in line with the principle of “Nothing About Us Without Us”.  Also, tracking commitments and progress should be spearheaded by independent monitoring mechanisms led by Disabled Persons’ Organisations (DPOs). Furthermore, there is a need to establish permanent regional or sub-regional forums on disability rights and digital inclusion, rather than holding one-off events. These can be organised into thematic working groups (e.g., digital accessibility, education, employment, media, assistive technology, AI, etc.). Examples of good practice include national and regional Internet Governance Forums (IGFs) that feature disability-focused tracks, as well as the AU- or REC-hosted Disability and Digital Inclusion Roundtables, which have rotating leadership. Additionally, there is a need to utilise regional standards to align efforts and reduce fragmentation, thereby facilitating easier collaboration across borders. Furthermore, there is a need to invest in capacity building across all sectors on accessibility, disability budgeting, and inclusive policy design for governments; disability-inclusive and non-stigmatising reporting for journalists; universal design and accessibility testing for the tech development community; and policy, research, and digital skills for DPOs.

There is a need to implement community-led digital literacy, design accessible & affordable technology, create inclusive policies, foster multi-stakeholder partnerships (including NGOs, tech companies, and government), and collect disaggregated data to tailor programs to their specific needs. Additionally, it is important to involve these groups in decision-making to foster trust and develop solutions that address the unique barriers of cost, accessibility, and safety concerns. 

There is a need to promote research and innovation in ICT and disability/ICT accessibility for persons with disabilities, which can inform local policy, practice (including the development of interventions), and technology development for persons with disabilities. To date, most efforts have focused on advocacy, policy development, capacity building, and, to some extent, the development of assistive technologies. Grounding these initiatives in research can lead to more effective policies, practices and local assistive technologies.

29Dec

Samantha Sibanda

Author CIPESA Posted on

Who is Samantha Sibanda?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

29Dec

 Dr. Abdul Busuulwa

Author CIPESA Posted on

Who is Dr. Abdul Busuulwa?

I am a Ugandan male with a visual impairment. I come from a humble family where resources were severely limited. Nevertheless, I managed to jump all the hurdles of growing up, and now I have a wife and four children.

With over 25 years of working experience, my career has been shaped around social development, training NGOs, conducting research, engaging in human rights advocacy, and promoting accessible ICTs for persons with disabilities. My career started with a short stint in journalism (freelance reporting) in the late 1990s. I transitioned to disability inclusion and capacity building, holding two positions at the Uganda National Association of the Blind (UNAB) and the National Union of Disabled Persons of Uganda (NUDIPU) between 2000 and 2008. Currently, I am a lecturer at Kyambogo University in the Department of Community and Disability Studies, where I teach several courses, supervise and coordinate research, and train future professionals in Community Development and Social Justice, Community-Based Rehabilitation (CBR), disability studies, and inclusive development. Before my current role, I served as the Executive Director of CBR Africa Network (CAN), a regional organisation dedicated to networking and sharing information on community-based rehabilitation, disability inclusion, and advocacy across the African continent, from 2017 to 2020.

My motivation to become a disability, digital rights, and inclusion advocate in Africa stemmed from the challenges of accessing written information. As a Braille user from primary to tertiary education, I always got limited support in reading printed materials, although resilience and determination enabled me to succeed academically. Very often, I was unable to do class assignments satisfactorily just because of not reading as widely as my educational contemporaries who were endowed with sight. Even when I tried, sighted readers were often less than willing to provide me with adequate support.

The realisation that others were also struggling with the same challenge motivated me to take a six-week certificate course in computer literacy for the blind in 2001, after which I sought to train many of my kind in the use of computers and the Internet so they could easily obtain as much information in digital form as they wished. On a personal note, starting to access documents in soft copy was the real game-changer in my pursuit of a Master’s in Management Studies at Uganda Management Institute and a PhD in Accessible ICTs for People with Visual Disabilities from the University of Twente in the Netherlands. As I mentioned earlier, I struggled with large volumes of notes in Braille notes while pursuing a Bachelor of Arts in Mass Communication from Makerere University and a Postgraduate Diploma in Community-Based Rehabilitation from the Institute of Teacher Education, Kyambogo (now part of Kyambogo University). This was no longer the case after accessing online repositories of articles and so on!

When the government enacted the Access to Information Act of 2005, I ensured that I participated in the process. I submitted my views on access to information for persons with disabilities to the parliamentary committee that was collecting public views.

Two developments have been crucial in the progress toward expanding digital rights and including persons with disabilities in Africa. First was the adoption of the MarrakeshTreaty in 2013, an international agreement on the rights of persons who are blind, have low vision, or have a print disability to access published works. The second was the enactment of the Protocolto the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2018 by the African Union Assembly, which has several articles (especially Article 2 and Article 19) that recognise digital rights for persons with disabilities in Africa.

One initiative I would like to mention is the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This initiative addresses at least five Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that have direct and/or implicit references to disability inclusion. Furthermore, many African countries have signed and ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), a commendable step towards the realisation and protection of various rights of persons with disabilities. Articles 9 and 21 are specifically related to digital rights; however, Articles 2, 5, 26, and 32 are also highly relevant in this context.

The ever-changing technology landscape is a direct threat to the realisation of digital rights and disability inclusion in Africa. It is worth noting that Africa is not a major manufacturer of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) products, such as computers, smartphones, and other Internet accessories; therefore, enabling their accessibility for persons with disabilities will always remain a retrospective rather than a proactive approach.

Additionally, the two other major challenges to digital rights for persons with disabilities include the high cost of obtaining Assistive Technology (such as screen readers, screen magnifiers, captioning software, alternative keyboards, and automatic speech-to-text translation software) and the emergence of Artificial Intelligence. Very often, persons with disabilities are unemployed and therefore lack the means to procure expensive Assistive Technology they need for effective use of mainstream ICTs. On the side of Artificial Intelligence, although this may increase the precision of Assistive Technology in task completion, some systems where this is embedded may run the risk of perpetuating and replicating discrimination that persons with disabilities are already experiencing in education, employment, and healthcare. For example, Artificial Intelligence (AI) models that cannot take into account the slowness associated with some disabilities in the completion of an input task may fail a person with that disability to ever fill an online form fully and correctly; hence putting them at a disadvantage when trying to apply for a job, medical insurance, or anything else important in their life.

We can build trust, promote partnerships, and enhance regional collaboration among different African stakeholders in the disability rights movement (including governments, inter-governmental bodies, civil society, industry, media, and academia) by simply creating awareness about disability and persons with disabilities. There are several myths and misconceptions about disability and persons with disabilities that require deconstructing and dispelling. For example, some people still believe that disability is a burden to society; hence, persons with disabilities should be isolated and made to live in their own designated parts and should allow the community to get on without them. While others think that persons with disabilities are less intelligent, less able, or less competent in their work. You cannot, therefore, expect such individuals to give jobs to qualified persons with disabilities, either in the public or private sectors of the economy. Many others believe that disability is contagious. These kinds of myths and attitudes hinder disability inclusion efforts, and they have had far-reaching consequences for the realisation of disability rights in Africa. Negative attitudes have always stood in the way of the financial contributions that African governments can make towards dismantling barriers to disability inclusion, such as the provision of Reasonable Accommodations and ensuring accessibility in public transport, education, information, and the physical environment for all, including persons with disabilities.

Disability is a cross-cutting issue. Therefore, the only way to ensure that persons with disabilities and other marginalised communities (women, youth, and older persons) are included in efforts to promote digital rights and inclusion in Africa is to take deliberate efforts to include persons with disabilities in the structures, systems, and processes of other marginalised communities. That way, all efforts to promote digital rights will automatically include issues related to disability. As an academic, I would like to humbly appeal to academic institutions to introduce disability studies course units across all their educational programs to raise awareness about disabilities.

1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 39