Promoting Effective and Inclusive ICT Policy in Africa

Tag Archives: surveillance

  HomeCollaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)  /  surveillance
05Jun

Online Privacy and Security: The Debate And The Dilemma

Author admin Posted on

By Ashnah Kalemera
The issue of internet users’ privacy and security has been widely debated since the Edward Snowden revelations last June put a magnifying glass on the extremes that some governments, such as the U.S., are prepared to go to in the fight against terrorism and cybercrime.
To-date, debate rages on amongst human rights activists, government, media, academia and the private sector on the effects of surveillance on internet freedoms. It is also becoming apparent that some developing countries are also taking to surveillance of their citizens’ communications.
These discussions continued at this year’s Stockholm Internet Forum (SIF), themed “Internet: privacy, transparency, surveillance and control”. The annual forum hosted by the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs in partnership with the country’s Internet Infrastructure Foundation (.se) and the Swedish Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), took place in Stockholm, Sweden, May 27–28, 2014.
In her opening address, Anna-Karin Hatt, Sweden’s Minister for Information Technology, said there would be grave consequences to basic human rights if states across the world continued to undertake unrestricted surveillance.
“During the last year, we have had more than one reason to discuss the behaviour between states and the behaviour of states within their borders,” she said. “The most valuable lesson has been that all surveillance must be subjected to strict limitations.” She added that “no system of surveillance must be justified because it is technologically possible.”
Rather, where legitimate cause exists, “surveillance must be proportional to the benefits it brings to citizens in terms of reduction in crime and improved security”. Furthermore, she argued, it must be based on transparent laws that are adopted through democratic processes.
She also noted that the last year had seen many multi-stakeholder meetings and processes on the matter. These included the 2013 global Internet Governance Forum, NetMundial, the Freedom Online Coalition, and the 2014 Cyber Dialogue. However, she added, it was still important to continue these discussions with participation from a broad range of state and non-state stakeholders in order to reach a consensus.
According to the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), only 19% of Africans use the internet compared to 75% (Europe), 32% (Asia) and 65% (the Americas). Africa also has the lowest mobile phone penetration rates. Low literacy levels, high cost of accessing and owning ICT, acute shortages of electricity, gender inequalities and a shortage of skilled human resources have contributed to the continent’s low ICT use. Even with this limited access, internet use is further impeded by government policies and practices that threaten internet freedom.
While African governments may not be blatantly or capably conducting surveillance on the scale of the National Security Agency (NSA) in the U.S., in recent years they have not shied away from requesting for social media users’ information and seeking content take downs. This is a reflection of the growing interest in what citizens are doing online.
According to the recently published State of Internet Freedom in East Africa report, national constitutions and a number of legislations on the continent provide for freedoms of expression, assembly, privacy and access to information. However, various recently enacted laws take away from citizens’ enjoyment of these freedoms in the online space.
James A. Lewis, director and senior fellow at the American Centre for Strategic and International Studies, asserted that post-Snowden, the debate had shifted from freedom of expression to privacy versus security. The latter were not guaranteed on the internet. “I have never seen a government that does not conduct surveillance on its own citizens. The challenge is extending sovereignty without sacrificing human rights,” he said.
But what is the perception in the developing world where it is estimated that the next billion internet users will come from? Should Africa prioritise access over security? Alison Gillwald, executive director of Research ICT Africa, noted that many people on the continent are more concerned about getting access to the internet and less so their privacy online.
Meanwhile, emerging threats from terrorist and militia groups in Africa seem to have influenced the way some governments perceive internet freedom. In Nigeria, Gbenga Sesan noted that the abduction of 300 schoolgirls by a Muslim extremist group had re-enforced state surveillances measures. “The government is using such incidents to justify ‘rule of law’: ‘if we should provide you with more security, we need to access your privacy’,” said Mr. Sesan.
Perhaps, as Eileen Donahue, Director of Global Affairs at Human Rights Watch pointed out, even with continued discussion and research on the matter, “we may not be able to figure out how to proactively reconcile the internet and human rights.”

08Oct

Freedom on the Net 2013: An African Review

Author admin Posted on

The increasing use of the Internet worldwide has continued to see governments put caveats on its openness and the range of freedoms users enjoy online. According to the 2013 Freedom on the Net report, in the period May 2012–April 2013, the global number of censored websites has increased, while internet users in various countries have been arrested, tortured, and killed over the information they posted online.
In Sub Saharan Africa, Freedom House found that both physical and technical mechanisms of filtering, monitoring or otherwise obstructing free speech online have been employed by states concerned with the power of internet-based technologies.
“All 10 of the African countries examined in this report have stepped up their online monitoring efforts in the past year, either by obtaining new technical capabilities or by expanding the government’s legal authority,” says the report which was published by Freedom House on October 3, 2013. Last year, Ethiopia was the only country in the region found to implement nationwide internet filtering.
In its study, Freedom House covered developments in internet freedom in 60 countries around the world.  Based on an examination of obstacles to access, limits to content, and violation of user rights on the internet, countries were scored as ‘Free’, ‘Partly Free’ or ‘Not Free’.
Table 1: Summary of Global Freedom on the Net Rankings (Source: by author based on Freedom on the Net 2013 report)

Continent Free Not Free Partly Free Total
Asia 2 8 4 14
Eurasia 3 5 2 10
Australia, EU, Iceland and the United States 9     9
Latin America 1 4 1 6
Middle East and North Africa   5 6 11
Sub-Saharan Africa 2 6 2 10
Total 17 28 15 60

Free
South Africa and Kenya were the two countries reported as Free. In Kenya, mention was made of the communications regulatory authority issuing guidelines to internet service providers not to allow services to be used to spread hate speech. Service providers were also reportedly required to install internet traffic monitoring equipment.
In South Africa, the proposed Protection of State Information bill which criminalises reporting on classified state information and accessing leaked information online would violate user rights if passed into law. Another legislation, the General Intelligence Laws Amendment 2013, which gives authorities the power to intercept bulk communications known as “foreign signals intelligence” was passed in July 2013. The partially state-owned Telkom network was also said to have installed servers to harvest data and user information. The extent to which this spyware has been deployed in the country was unknown.
Partly Free
Freedom house ranked Malawi, Nigeria, Angola, Uganda, Rwanda and Zimbabwe as ‘Partly Free’. A draft Interception of Communications law in Nigeria was criticised for potentially infringing on user’s right to privacy. There were also reports that the Nigerian government had awarded a contract to an Israeli based company to monitor internet communications. A privately owned ISP was said to have installed surveillance malware. It is unclear if the installation was at the bidding of the state.
Suspicions of online government surveillance in Uganda increased in part due to officials publically expressing “the need” for policing Internet mediums. A new communications law, the Uganda Communications Act, passed in September 2012 created a regulatory authority with sweeping powers to oversee electronic, print and broadcast media. The body’s independence has been called into question. As a sim card (including mobile internet) registration exercises drew to a close, there were privacy concerns due to the country’s lack of data protection legislation. The country already has lawful interception of communications regulations.
There were no reports of internet content being blocked or filtered in Zimbabwe. However, ruling party officials were said to have publicly expressed the desire to increase control over ICTs, particularly in the lead-up to the July 2013 general elections. Zimbabwe was also said to be seeking foreign support for surveillance in Iran. “Personnel from the Zimbabwean armed forces and the Central Intelligence Organisation have been undergoing intensive cyber training in technological warfare techniques, counter-intelligence and methods of suppressing popular revolts among others, every six months,” says the report.
Egypt was also reported to be seeking surveillance assistance from Iran. Activists and social media users were also targeted by security forces during protests either through abductions, killings or prosecution.
In Libya, surveillance equipment from the Muammar Gaddafi regime remained in operation.
Despite being reported as a ”country at risk” in 2013 owing to its “strict” controls over traditional media which were feared may extend to digital media, improvements were reported in Rwanda. An amended media law expanded the rights of journalists and recognised freedom for online communications.
Meanwhile, Angola’s State Security Services, with assistance from Germany, were planning to implement an electronic monitoring system to track digital communications.
Not Free
The Sudanese government was accused of surveillance particularly during protests. In addition to harassment and arrest of journalists during and following the protests, intelligence services are said to have “ramped up” efforts to censor antigovernment content, target cyber-dissidents, and manipulate online information.
In September 2012, Ethiopia “toughened” restrictions on electronic communications by passing the Telecom Fraud Offence Proclamation law. The government was also allegedly increasing its technical capacity to filter, block and monitor the internet with assistance from the Chinese authorities and the use of Finfisher – a commercial spyware software.
Globally, Iceland and Estonia were ranked the freest while China, Cuba and Iran were said to be the “most repressive countries” in terms of internet freedom.
Under the OpenNetAfrica initiative, CIPESA researches into internet freedoms in various African countries. To learn more, to share an idea or report a violation, write to programmes @cipesa.org. 

01Mar

Balancing Freedom of Expression And Privacy

Author admin Posted on

Striking a balance between freedom of expression and privacy on the internet was the focus of a panel discussion at a review of one decade after the World Summit of the Information Society (WSIS). The WSIS+10 Review meeting took place at the UNESCO headquarters in Paris, France, February 25-27, 2013.
What convergences and tensions exist between freedom of expression and privacy online? What are the implications of approaching the balance between free expression and privacy from a freedom of expression–centric point of view? What actions can governments, civil society, media and the private sector take to balance privacy with freedom of expression online? And what is the best way to empower users? These are some of the questions addressed at the session on ‘Promoting of Freedom of Expression and Privacy Online’. CIPESA’s Lillian Nalwoga was the remote moderator for the session.
The session built on earlier discussions held at the 7th Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Baku, Azerbaijan on promoting both freedom of expression and privacy on the internet. It also drew from the Global Survey of Internet Privacy and Freedom of Expression – a UNESCO 2012 publication – which highlights a diverse international regulatory landscape, and the challenges posed by discrepancies in laws pertaining to the online and off-line spheres, and between national and international jurisdictions.
During the session, Pranesh Prakash from the India-based Center for Internet Society stressed the need for more relaxed regulations to govern the conduct of the private sector. He noted that “one must give the private sector enough leeway to safeguard them from responsibility for users’ actions and the requirement of taking down reasonable speech.” However, he added that the commercial sector has divergent interests and they do not necessarily align with public interests.
According to him, differing public and private sector interests coupled with unenforceability of self-regulation mechanisms and the jurisdictional issues of the internet mean that the conflict between freedom of expression and privacy cannot be easily resolved through public policy options that are only aimed at the private sector.
Patrick Ryan, a Policy Counsel from Google who was also a panelist, argued that the move to the “cloud” brings with it both enhanced privacy and security benefits, while at the same time putting data  potentially at risk. Noting that government surveillance remained one of the biggest threats to privacy, he stressed that the private sector needs to share more information on government take down requests that violate individuals’ privacy and free speech.
Meanwhile, William Dutton, a professor of Internet Studies at Oxford Internet Institute, stressed the importance of recognising the power of the internet in empowering networked individuals and enabling freedom of expression, like never before. He cautioned that if nations do not approach the issue of striking a balance between freedom of expression and privacy appropriately, some of the key benefits of the internet may be lost. He noted that whilst some nations have taken progressive steps, many others are moving in the wrong direction and various global policy choices are increasingly restricting freedom of expression.
Indeed, this has been illustrated by worldwide trends towards more content filtering and censorship. Dutton said adopting inappropriate models for internet governance and regulation, such as disproportionate levels of surveillance in the name of security, reliance on intermediaries to regulate content, and assertion of national sovereignty and jurisdiction in the online world are threatening privacy and freedom of expression.
Key recommendations from this session were: avoiding a moral panic over privacy; creating widespread awareness of issues concerning privacy and data protection among users especially the young generation; updating policy and regulatory frameworks that address freedom of expression and privacy online; and having a clear definition on national security interests.
For more information, please visit – https://www.unesco-ci.org/cmscore/events
Promoting of Freedom of Expression and Privacy Online
Follow WSIS+10 on twitter at #WSIS

1 … 10 11 12
en en