Workshop Report 28, 11, 2013 Kampala
By CIPESA
While the legislation in Uganda states the circumstances under which an order may be made for online content to be taken down or blocked, recent years have seen instances of takedowns that have not followed the law. There have been orders to take down or block access to certain websites, with at least one court case against an online journalist.[3] One journalist is on trial over an article published online in 2010. He was initially charged with “intent to defame the person of the President.”
On April 14, 2011, the regulator – the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) – instructed ISPs to block access to Facebook and Twitter for 24 hours “to eliminate the connection and sharing of information that incites the public” in the face of opposition protests.”[4] Uganda passed an interception of communications law in 2010 to give effect to aspects of an anti-terrorism law of 2002 under which journalists who “promote terrorism” can be liable to capital punishment. A registration of all SIM card owners in Uganda exercise concluded on May 31, 2013, which could make the monitoring easier.
Introduction
The Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern
Africa (CIPESA, www.cipesa.org) in conjunction with
Unwanted Witness Uganda (www.unwantedwitness.or.ug) on November 28, 2013
organised a workshop on promoting internet rights in Uganda. The workshop aimed
to create awareness among civil society, netizens, and the media in Uganda on
how policy and practice affect internet freedoms in the country. The workshop
also sought to draw up strategies for network building and advocacy to promote
and protect online freedoms in Uganda.
Background to the workshop
The
internet has become an important domain for citizen participation in democratic
processes, as well for increased scrutiny of government actions. In turn, there
is recognition at the global level[1] that the rights citizens enjoy online need
to be protected as much as the human rights that are enjoyed in the physical
world.
In Uganda, however, there are few conversations on the need to promote online freedoms (also referred to as internet rights). Informed, sustained, and inclusive debate about the need to preserve the privacy of individuals as well as the need for persons and organisations to enjoy the breadth of rights of expression that are enabled by ICTs, is often lacking. Similarly, there is a paucity of information on the state of online freedoms in the country, a mapping of actors in this sphere, and advocacy positions and resources that can be utilised in creating awareness and lobbying for the protection and promotion of internet freedoms.
In Uganda, however, there are few conversations on the need to promote online freedoms (also referred to as internet rights). Informed, sustained, and inclusive debate about the need to preserve the privacy of individuals as well as the need for persons and organisations to enjoy the breadth of rights of expression that are enabled by ICTs, is often lacking. Similarly, there is a paucity of information on the state of online freedoms in the country, a mapping of actors in this sphere, and advocacy positions and resources that can be utilised in creating awareness and lobbying for the protection and promotion of internet freedoms.
This creates the need for: understanding how policy and practice affect
internet freedoms in the Uganda, forming a network of national and regional
actors involved in the promotion of internet freedoms, raising awareness and
spurring multi-stakeholder conversations on the importance of protecting
internet rights the way human rights have always been protected and promoted.
Equally important is for users to know that as much as the internet gives
seemingly unlimited freedoms, their actions online can have negative
consequences on society and direct repercussions on themselves. This calls for
responsible online actions, including an awareness of the law but also having
safety skills.
Uganda has an estimated 6.2 million internet users and according to
Alexa.com[2], social
media sites – Facebook, Youtube, Twitter and blogspot are among the top ten
most visited sites in the country. On May 30, 2013, the Uganda government
announced that it would form a social media monitoring centre “to weed out
those who use this media to damage the government and people’s reputations” and
also targeted at those “bent to cause a security threat to the nation.”
In recent years, some government departments have ordered curtails on the citizens’ right to seek, receive, and impart information through digital technologies, including ordering a temporary shutdown of some services such as SMS, and instructing internet service providers to block access to some websites. Uganda is also among six African countries that asked Facebook to disclose users’ details, according to the organisation’s transparency report for the first six months of 2013.
In recent years, some government departments have ordered curtails on the citizens’ right to seek, receive, and impart information through digital technologies, including ordering a temporary shutdown of some services such as SMS, and instructing internet service providers to block access to some websites. Uganda is also among six African countries that asked Facebook to disclose users’ details, according to the organisation’s transparency report for the first six months of 2013.
On April 14, 2011, the regulator – the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) – instructed ISPs to block access to Facebook and Twitter for 24 hours “to eliminate the connection and sharing of information that incites the public” in the face of opposition protests.”[4] Uganda passed an interception of communications law in 2010 to give effect to aspects of an anti-terrorism law of 2002 under which journalists who “promote terrorism” can be liable to capital punishment. A registration of all SIM card owners in Uganda exercise concluded on May 31, 2013, which could make the monitoring easier.
Accordingly, the workshop addressed issues such as:
[3] See CIPESA, Uganda’s Assurances on Social
Media Monitoring Ring Hollow, June 10, 2013, http://www.cipesa.org/2013/06/ugandas-assurances-on-social-media-monitoring-ring-hollow/
1)
What are online freedoms and why do they need to be protected?
2)
Status of online freedoms in
Uganda.
3)
Threats and challenges to online freedoms in Uganda
4)
Strategising and network building for promoting and protecting online
freedoms and online expression in Uganda.
Workshop Presentations
Uganda Freedom on
the Net Report 2013, Grace
Natabaalo, Programme Associate, African Centre for Media Excellence
According to a 2013 report on the state of online freedom for Uganda[5], which the presenter co-authored, there were no
reports of internet content being blocked or filtered during 2012 and in the
first quarter of 2013, although various government officials publicly expressed
the “need” to police online discussions.
The Uganda Communications Act 2012 was passed in September, creating a new media regulatory body that has been criticised for its lack of independence from the government. Meanwhile, SIM card and mobile internet registrations continued through early 2013 amid concerns that the registration requirements infringed on the right to privacy given the lack of a necessary data protection law. Overall, she said, government harassment for online writing was documented, while suspicions of proactive government surveillance of online communications increased in the past year.
The Uganda Communications Act 2012 was passed in September, creating a new media regulatory body that has been criticised for its lack of independence from the government. Meanwhile, SIM card and mobile internet registrations continued through early 2013 amid concerns that the registration requirements infringed on the right to privacy given the lack of a necessary data protection law. Overall, she said, government harassment for online writing was documented, while suspicions of proactive government surveillance of online communications increased in the past year.
Ms. Natabaalo said internet penetration was growing but there were
hindrances to use, including poor infrastructure, prohibitive costs, and poor
quality of service. Social media and blogging platforms were freely available
in Uganda and they were among the most visited websites. In the past, however,
there were incidents when the government directed Internet Service Providers to
block access to certain services and sites.
She noted that the Uganda police chief had recently called for policing of social media, and that there were several laws that appeared to negate constitutional guarantees for freedom of expression. She said Ugandans online were becoming more open but were often subjected to threats from government functionaries. She also mentioned that there was self-censorship online, with matters of the president’s family and many issues related to the military considered taboo topics. Overall, Uganda was categorised by freedom House as ‘Partly Free’.
She noted that the Uganda police chief had recently called for policing of social media, and that there were several laws that appeared to negate constitutional guarantees for freedom of expression. She said Ugandans online were becoming more open but were often subjected to threats from government functionaries. She also mentioned that there was self-censorship online, with matters of the president’s family and many issues related to the military considered taboo topics. Overall, Uganda was categorised by freedom House as ‘Partly Free’.
The Ugandan blogosphere, privacy and threats to
expression, Esther
Nakkazi, a blogger and journalist: According to Ms. Nakkazi,
the use
of technology can have positive and negative impacts. Citing a report by the
Swedish Programme for ICTs in Developing Regions (Spider) she said technology allows
people to connect with one another at a speed and scale unimaginable and with a
degree of anonymity.
However, what we do now to preserve privacy and fundamental freedom online will have a profound effect on the next generation of users: either the number will grow or shrink. In Uganda, the number of users is growing but there is a need to ponder privacy considerations. As has been noted by Spider, privacy is a right and human rights are universal.
As such, behaviour that is unacceptable offline is unacceptable online, whether by governments or individuals. Therefore, users of social media and other ICTs need to be aware that the responsible behaviour expected in the offline world is also expected in the online world.
However, what we do now to preserve privacy and fundamental freedom online will have a profound effect on the next generation of users: either the number will grow or shrink. In Uganda, the number of users is growing but there is a need to ponder privacy considerations. As has been noted by Spider, privacy is a right and human rights are universal.
As such, behaviour that is unacceptable offline is unacceptable online, whether by governments or individuals. Therefore, users of social media and other ICTs need to be aware that the responsible behaviour expected in the offline world is also expected in the online world.
She stated that the internet is a key means by which individuals can
exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression, as guaranteed by
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
But there are many other uses to which Ugandans are putting the internet, with blogs, twitter and Facebook among the prominent platforms used. These include: for ‘exhibitions’ (pictures and videos) of their social lives, or to converse. There is also discussion of politics and news; monitoring of services delivery, searching for funding, doing business, sports betting, participation in interest groups, marketing and many more.
But there are many other uses to which Ugandans are putting the internet, with blogs, twitter and Facebook among the prominent platforms used. These include: for ‘exhibitions’ (pictures and videos) of their social lives, or to converse. There is also discussion of politics and news; monitoring of services delivery, searching for funding, doing business, sports betting, participation in interest groups, marketing and many more.
However, there are threats to privacy and free expression for Ugandan
internet users. Access to at least one site was blocked (Radio Katwe),
journalist Timothy Kalyegira was charged over an article he published online,
local princess Ruth Komuntale had her privacy severely invaded during a
break-up of her marriage, and there are indications of government agencies
intending to monitor what citizens are doing online. There is also a lot of
false unchecked information online.
This raises some questions: Who are the people who are under threat? And
if we want to protect internet rights, how do we promote responsible behaviour?
Are there existing systems with models we can build on? How can anonymity be
secured in situations when anonymous submissions and leaks of sensitive
information are communicated? Are there circumstances in which we need to
adjust these concerns? Who needs to have oversight? Who needs to be involved?
What external expertise do we need to have?
Introduction to the OpenNet
Africa Initiative – Ashnah Kalemera, Programmes Associate, CIPESA
The OpenNet Africa[6] Initiative
aims to promote and monitor internet freedoms in East and Southern Africa, with
the focus countries being Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania,
and Uganda. Why OpenNet Africa? Because there are few conversations in African
countries on online matters; and where these conversations related to internet
freedoms are taking place, they are often not informed by research, nor are
they driven by an agenda that seeks to educate citizens and promote liberal
regimes of online rights. And yet if digital technologies can promote
democracy, there is need to protect individuals and organisations that use
these technologies. The OpenNet Africa portal contains primary and secondary
data, including:
•
Information on African internet freedoms and cyber security
•
Research Materials
•
Censorship incidents
•
African Initiatives promoting internet rights
•
Policy and advocacy material.
Defending Digital Rights in Uganda, Godfrey Wokulira Ssebaggala, Director, Unwanted Witness Uganda[7].
Unwanted Witness was founded to defend digital rights and to join hands
with other organisations working to promote digital freedoms and the use of
modern technologies to change lives. With the proliferating use of ICT tools,
it was realised that there were opportunities, threats and challenges.
The presenter stated that secret surveillance was going on in Uganda,
with security services spying on unsuspecting citizens. He said telecom providers
were accomplices in the government-run surveillance. According to him, there
are three pieces of legislation in Uganda – all passed in the last three years
– on interception of communications, computer misuse, and the communication
regulatory authority – which could be used to deny citizens their internet
rights. He regretted that the policymaking process related to these policies
was not participatory.
Threats and Challenges to Online Rights; Strategies for Network Building
and Advocacy - Lillian Nalwoga, Policy
Officer, CIPESA.
This session focused on prevalent threats and challenges to online
freedoms in Uganda, and drew up some advocacy and network building
possibilities. Below is a summary.
Threats to online
freedoms in Uganda
|
Challenges to online
freedoms in Uganda
|
Actions needed
|
Limited skills/ awareness of internet usage
|
Low digital literacy levels
|
Increase public awareness through sensitisation both online and
offline
|
Low internet penetration in the country
|
Limited accessibility & affordability of internet
|
Train users, civil society in online etiquette
|
Hackers’ intrusion into users’ private information
|
Low access to electricity
|
Train police/ security agents on online freedoms
|
High data prices online
|
Strict policies/laws on internet usage/online freedom
|
Advocate increased awareness of/ affordability of internet
|
Conservatism, religion and culture
|
Uganda’s capacity to monitor online freedom
|
Advocate for Uganda govt. to respect online freedoms
|
Government surveillance on online freedom
|
Surveillance by government
|
Cyber laws should be changed to respect online freedoms
|
Discussions
There were questions on the methodology of the Freedom House report,
specifically what issues are evaluated to determine whether the country is free
or not free as far as freedom on the net was concerned. There was also debate on
whether these evaluation criteria added up to the state of democracy in a
country. It was widely held that a country where there was no online freedom
was unlikely to be democratic.
It was pointed out that in Uganda, journalists plus all people who are
active users of social media, as well as activists – for human rights,
environmental protection, or gay rights – are potentially under threat. There
was therefore need to protect the internet rights of a broad category of users
but also to make them responsible while they communicate and engage via digital
technologies. Social media users were also advised to use as many channels as
possible, rather than relying on one to avoid being shut down completely if one
of their platforms was interfered with.
There were concerns about the possibility that Huawei, the Chinese
company installing a fibre backbone for the Uganda government, could carry out
surveillance on users. The media was challenged to educate the public on the
importance of protecting internet freedoms, while government was challenged to
do more to increase internet access and use. However, there was need to create
awareness about online freedoms-related legislations among not only ordinary
citizens but also the media and legislators.
Participants also regretted that few Ugandans take part in policy making
processes, even in instances where parliamentary committees call for public
input. Concern was also expressed that the country’s laws, including those that
were ICT-related, seemed to be mainly concerned with controlling citizens
rather than assuring their privacy and giving them space for free expression.
Furthermore, civil society was challenged to keep an eye out on the data
protection bill which cabinet had debated and which might soon be in
parliament. It was also noted that if government officials were not engaged in
dialogues and awareness raising activities on internet rights, little might be
achieved in promoting progressive policies and practices on online freedoms.
Finally, civil society was advised not to campaign for “rogue freedom”.
In other words, civil society should promote responsible use of ICTs, with
users educated on legal and legitimate limits to their freedoms, otherwise irresponsible
behaviour might give the government an excuse to clamp down on citizens’
freedoms.
[1]See, for instance,
Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection
of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, May 26, 2011; http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/17session/a.hrc.17.27_en.pdf
[2] Top Sites in Uganda
http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/UG
[3] See CIPESA, Uganda’s Assurances on Social
Media Monitoring Ring Hollow, June 10, 2013, http://www.cipesa.org/2013/06/ugandas-assurances-on-social-media-monitoring-ring-hollow/
[5] Freedom House, Freedom on the Net 2013 Report, http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/freedom-net-2013
[7] Unwanted Witness, https://unwantedwitness.or.ug
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.