Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Tag Archives: Social Media

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  Social Media
10Jun

Overview of CIPESA Policy Submissions to International Bodies and Governments

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

Africa’s digital rights landscape is evolving rapidly, shaped by new legislation, emerging technologies, and recurring threats to civic space. CIPESA has remained actively engaged in documenting these developments, including through the annual State of Internet Freedom in Africa reports and through broader programming.

Over the last few months, we have made submissions to various international bodies and national governments, filed legal interventions, and provided expert commentary to advance internet freedom, digital inclusion, and democratic governance.

Below is an overview of our key submissions and commentaries in recent months.

Engaging Global Bodies on Technology Governance

Submission on How the WHO Digital Health Strategy Should Govern Data, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI): In March 2026, CIPESA submitted recommendations to the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Africa on the development of the Global Digital Health Strategy for 2028–2033, urging that the strategy be anchored on human rights, equity, and accountability. CIPESA warned that most AI systems used in African healthcare are trained on non-African datasets, increasing risks of inaccurate diagnoses and exclusions, and called for mandatory “explainability” standards, equity impact assessments, and domestic investment in digital health infrastructure.

Recommendations to the OHCHR: Also in March, CIPESA submitted to the UN Human Rights Council under Resolution 58/23 on the risks digital technologies pose to human rights defenders in Africa. The submission examined legal and policy developments, tech-facilitated attacks including against women HRDs, AI-related risks, and challenges facing civil society and companies, while recommending stronger corporate measures to identify, assess, and prevent harm to HRDs. CIPESA submitted comments and recommendations on due diligence and improved responses to digital technology-related risks faced by human rights defenders.

Engaging National Governments on Digital Legislation Commentary on Zimbabwe National AI Strategy: The Southern African state recently adopted its National AI Strategy 2026–2030 (AI strategy)  to guide its digital technology and transformation. The strategy aims to accelerate development, enhance industrialisation, and improve service delivery in sectors such as health, finance, agriculture, education and public administration. The strategy also emphasises building local data infrastructure as opposed to relying on foreign data storage infrastructure while promoting an AI governance approach grounded in Ubuntu, human rights, accountability, transparency and inclusivity. However, an important question is whether Zimbabwe’s approach offers useful lessons for other African countries developing national AI strategies. Find our commentary here.

Submission on the Uganda AI and Emerging Technologies Strategy: In March 2026, CIPESA submitted recommendations to Uganda’s National AI and Emerging Technologies Strategy Taskforce, welcoming the country’s ambition to harness AI for development while cautioning that innovation must be matched with legal, institutional, and ethical safeguards. Find a commentary here.

CIPESA called for a rights-by-design approach including mandatory Human Rights Impact Assessments for high-risk AI systems, algorithmic transparency, local data representation, and meaningful civil society participation in shaping Uganda’s AI strategy.

Outpaced by Its Own Ambition: Can Kenya Bridge Its AI Regulation Gap? This commentary highlighted the raw paradox at the heart of Kenya’s AI, noting that the country is simultaneously sprinting ahead in AI adoption while grappling with a shrinking space for the very digital voices that AI empowers. A key remains between ambition and readiness as the country ranks 93rd in the 2025 Government AI Readiness Index, due to persistent weaknesses in infrastructure, implementation, and institutional capacity. Find a commentary here.

Submission to the White Paper on ICT Tax Reduction in Uganda: A year ago, CIPESA submitted a position paper to the National Task Team on Enhancement of Government Revenue from the ICT Sector at the Uganda Ministry of ICT and National Guidance. The paper benchmarked Uganda’s ICT sector tax policies, licensing fees, and regulatory regimes against those of Kenya, Rwanda, and Tanzania. Since then various developments have emerged which inform the ICT tax regime in Uganda including the April 2026 passing of the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which rejected the controversial government proposal to impose an 18 percent tax on imported software after lawmakers warned it would undermine the country’s digital transformation agenda.

Engaging the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR)

ACHPR Resolution 630 on Monitoring Technology Companies: In March 2025, the ACHPR adopted Resolution 630, a timely step toward holding technology companies accountable for information integrity in Africa. CIPESA welcomed the move, contributed recommendations across key regional forums, and looks forward to strengthening the newly developed guidelines through the review process.

Prioritising Human Rights Defenders: CIPESA reviewed the Draft Declaration on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights Defenders in Africa, which seeks to help restore civic space for the effective protection of human rights. In its submission to the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and Focal Point on Reprisals in Africa, CIPESA highlighted the draft’s strengths, weaknesses, and gaps, and offered practical recommendations to align it with continental and global standards, particularly the 1998 UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. Find the submission here

Supporting the Ratification of the AU Disability Protocol: CIPESA has consistently called upon African Union member states to ratify the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Africa. Our submission to the ACHPR Working Group on the Rights of Older Persons and People with Disabilities in Africa (April 2022) argued that ratification is a matter of utmost priority and that without it, the digital rights of persons with disabilities across the continent remain inadequately protected.

Contributing to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

Joint Stakeholder Submission on Tanzania’s Digital Rights Record: Ahead of Tanzania’s fourth cycle UPR before the UN Human Rights Council set to take place in November 2026, CIPESA, alongside the Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU) and JamiiAfrica, submitted a joint stakeholder report documenting the state of digital rights in the country.

While acknowledging positive developments including the enactment of the Personal Data Protection Act, 2022, and reforms to the Media Services Act, the submission highlighted persistent concerns: the use of vague laws to suppress online expression, the blocking of platforms including Clubhouse, X, and JamiiForums, a nationwide internet shutdown during the 2025 general elections, and the escalating threat of Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV) against women journalists and activists.

The submission called on Tanzania to repeal or amend vague and overly broad laws, comply with international human rights standards on internet access, establish judicial oversight over surveillance, and invest in digital rights literacy.

Rwanda’s fourth cycle UPR review: Rwanda had its UPR review in January 2026 where following the November 2025 pre-session in Geneva, several permanent missions expressed eagerness to advance strong recommendations for Rwanda, and CIPESA’s evidence and recommendations were expected to inform their engagement during the formal review.

A joint submission by CIPESA and the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) noted that digital technologies have expanded the avenues through which women are targeted, often enabling harm that is faster, more pervasive, and harder to remedy.

Rwanda’s UPR presented a timely opportunity to adopt meaningful, future-focused reforms that uphold human rights, ensure accountability, and create a digital environment where all citizens, especially women, can participate safely, freely, and equally.

Since the review, the Rwandan government has noted they would undertake national consultations with relevant stakeholders to assess the recommendations and determine its position.

Liberia’s fourth cycle UPR review: CIPESA, in collaboration with the West Africa ICT Action Network (WAICTANET), submitted a joint stakeholder submission for Liberia’s consideration during the 50th session of the UPR. The joint submission observed that, although Liberia has taken preliminary steps towards aligning its domestic legal and policy framework with applicable regional and international human rights standards, substantial legal, institutional, and enforcement gaps persist. It called for the Government to adopt comprehensive data protection and cybersecurity legislation; safeguard the right to freedom of expression online; ensure accountability for violations against journalists, human rights defenders, and online actors; strengthen transparency and effective access to information; and implement targeted measures to bridge the digital divide.

Malawi’s fourth cycle UPR review: A joint submission was made by CIPESA alongside the The Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation (CHRR), the International Press Institute (IPI), the University of Birmingham, and Small Media, on digital rights in Malawi. The submission recommended law reform, full implementation of the Access to Information Act, affordable and inclusive internet access, independent oversight for digital rights violations, operationalisation of the Data Protection Act, protection of encryption, and safeguards against unlawful spyware use.

Looking Ahead

Across these engagements with the ACHPR, the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council, the WHO, and national governments in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, and Zambia, CIPESA’s work reflects a consistent commitment to promoting inclusive and effective use of ICT in Africa for improved governance and livelihoods.As the digital governance landscape continues to shift, our submissions serve as a continued resource for policymakers, civil society, the media and other entities committed to advancing internet freedom in Africa.

08Jun

CIPESA Annual Report 2025 Highlights Agility in A Changing Funding and Policy Landscape

Author CIPESA Posted on

By CIPESA Writer |

The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) is pleased to present its 2025 Annual Report. Made possible by a wide network of collaborators across Africa and beyond, our work reflects a year marked by agility, resilience, and responsiveness amid rapid shifts in technology, policy, and governance.

Across Africa, governments rapidly expanded the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), including national digital ID systems, surveillance tools, and e-government platforms, reshaping how power is exercised, services are delivered, and citizens engage with the state. At the same time, digital platforms remained central to political and civic life, amplifying both civic participation and manipulation.

Through our research, advocacy, and partnerships, the report highlights how digital transformation is reshaping everyday life and why protecting civic space and digital rights remains more important than ever.

Over the year, our work moved beyond who participates in digital governance across Africa to strengthening the quality and influence of that participation. We are deeply grateful to all our Network of allies whose support made our 2025 work possible.

In a year marked by significant shifts in the global funding landscape, their continued trust and commitment to digital rights in Africa was both enabling and affirming.

We remain committed to advancing an open, inclusive, and rights-respecting digital ecosystem in Africa, confident that when evidence, advocacy, and collective action come together, meaningful change is possible. Read more on the report below.

CIPESA Annual Report 2025
22May

Zimbabwe’s National AI Strategy: Policy Lessons for Africa

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Edrine Wanyama |

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

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

Lessons for Other African Countries

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

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

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

Alignment with the African Union (AU) AI Strategy

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

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

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

UNESCO Guidance on AI

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

14May

Rethinking Platform Design and Accountability to Combat TFGBV in Africa

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Alice Aparo |

Africa’s rapid digitalisation, spanning e-commerce, online services, and digital infrastructure, has been accompanied by a persistent rise of Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV). African women and girls are exposed to several forms of TFGBV, including online harassment, algorithmic discrimination, and deepfakes that prevent equal participation in online spaces.

To commemorate this year’s International Women’s Day, the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) convened a webinar themed Advancing platform accountability for women’s online safety in Africa to discuss efforts to enhance women’s online safety and hold digital platforms accountable.

A key insight from the discussion was that the rise of TFGBV in Africa is amplified by platform design, limited legal enforcement, weak moderation of content by digital platforms, and a poor system for reporting abuse and harmful content. The low levels of digital literacy, poor redress and appeals mechanisms, and lack of awareness among policymakers were also cited. Many of those who experience online abuse struggle to obtain justice and, in most cases, turn to self-censorship instead. This ultimately shrinks women’s voices in public discourse.

Further, online harm is often misframed as an individual responsibility, whereas it is largely enabled by platform design features such as anonymity and algorithm-driven content amplification that support harmful behaviour and accelerate the spread of harmful content. In her remarks, Barbra Okafor, founder and Lead Strategist at The Agency Lab, said major digital platforms prioritise “profit and scale over user safety”, adding that features like reposting and seamless sharing are built for viral amplification, not user protection.

Okafor added that when content that qualifies as harassment is posted, algorithms interpret the resulting engagement as “interest” and accelerate the distribution of the abuse rather than introducing safeguards. She described these platforms as “mini-gods” that have assumed regulatory power without corresponding accountability, making online user safety secondary to profit.

Gaps in content moderation, the limited inclusion of African linguistic expertise, and weaknesses in platform design and legal frameworks raise serious concerns about technology companies’ capacity to respond to harmful content in a timely and context-sensitive manner.

The increasing reliance on Artificial Intelligence (AI) for content moderation, yet it is largely trained on Western datasets, means it continues to struggle to detect harassment expressed in African languages or to interpret culturally specific slurs. This leaves women participating in public discourse exposed to unchecked, gendered insults and coordinated digital attacks.  

While AI-based features such as deepfake detection, content filters, and automated tools such as Safety Mode and Limits exist, their effectiveness is uneven across African contexts. These measures are further constrained by structural challenges, including limited investment in local content moderation and weak legal enforcement systems.

Marie-Simone Kadurira, an independent feminist researcher and panelist, noted that digital violence often mirrors and amplifies offline abuse, reinforcing patriarchal norms through technology. This perpetuates existing gender power imbalances and harmful social norms. She added that African women, particularly those in public-facing roles such as journalism, activism, or politics, face heightened, systemic harassment.

Despite the existence of cybersecurity and data protection laws in many African countries supported by regional instruments such as the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) Resolutions on developing Guidelines to assist States monitor technology companies in respect of their duty to maintain information integrity through independent fact-checking (ACHPR/Res. 630 (LXXXII) 2025) and the Resolution on the protection of women against digital violence in Africa (ACHPR/Res. 522 (LXXII) 2022) – addressing TFGBV remains a persistent problem across the continent. The two resolutions emphasise the obligation of African states to protect individuals, particularly women and girls, from digital harms, including online harassment, cyberstalking, non-consensual sharing of intimate images, and other forms of abuse.

Dr. Abudu Sallam Waiswa, Head Litigation, Prosecution and Legal Advisory at the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC), said effective legal enforcement remains challenging because most major platforms, such as Meta, Google, and X, are neither based nor registered on the African continent. This creates significant jurisdictional gaps that hinder thorough investigations and accountability.

Several recommendations emerged at the discussion:

  1. Platforms must hire and train African local content moderators with linguistic and cultural expertise across African contexts.
  2. Governments must shift from reactive legislation to forward-looking, preventive frameworks. This includes mandating that platforms provide transparency on their algorithmic moderation and establishing a local physical presence to facilitate legal accountability.
  3. Civil society and policymakers need to deepen their understanding of how algorithmic systems work in order to effectively monitor and govern them.
  4. Fund women’s rights organisations to continue to provide survivor support, document abuse, advocate for policy reform, and hold both governments and tech companies accountable in the fight against TFGBV.
  5. Strengthen the ability of users to recognise, respond to, and recover from online harm.
11May

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

Author CIPESA Posted on

By Raylenne Kambua |

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

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

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

A Nation Leading the Way in AI Adoption

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

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

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

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

Kenya’s AI Policy Landscape

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Way Ahead: AI Governance Focused on Human Rights

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

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

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

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

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

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

1 2 3 4 … 34