'Digital Authoritarianism' Threatening Basic Rights in Africa
The Claim
African countries keeping track of the internet and social media posts to safeguard national security interests.
News posted on
Emerging story
Circulating posts on social media, as well as news outlets such as The East African and Africa Centre, claim that social media and internet restrictions are done in the interest of national security.
The posts specify that restrictions particularly occur in the African continent such as in Uganda, Ethiopia, and Sudan.
It is alleged that the governments limit access in order to curb misinformation, “fake news, political trolls” and other threats in order to safeguard national security.
Some posts even claim that social media is completely blocked for security purposes. The claims are mostly referring to government statements that cite national security as a reason for restricting online access.
Although the claim has been circulating for a few years, it has recently been put under the spotlight.
Misbar’s Analysis
Misbars investigation found the claims to be false.
Internet and social media restrictions, limitations, regulations, and blockades carried out by African governments are not done solely for the sake of reasonable, national security.
According to a study by the African Digital Rights Network (ADRN) “digital authoritarianism” is threatening basic rights in Africa.
Researchers have documented 115 examples of technologies, tactics, and techniques used between 2000 and 2020 to restrict online “civic space”.
The study found that the most common tactics used were digital surveillance; disinformation; internet shutdowns; the introduction of laws reducing rights and arrests for online speech to limit online “civic space”.
In response to these restrictions, 65 examples of citizens using creative alternative methods such as social media, bulk SMS, encrypted messaging, and VPNs to voice opposition.
The study recorded 115 examples of tactics, techniques, and technologies used to censor or control the internet in 10 African countries, namely, South Africa, Cameroon, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Nigeria, Zambia, Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Egypt. Additionally, the study found that internet shutdowns in Africa rose from 21 in 2019 to 25 in 2020, with disinformation becoming increasingly common from governments, as well as private companies.
Although at times restrictions may be due to national security threats, the timing of internet or social media shutdowns or restrictions is also very indicative of the reason for it.
For example, during the Sudanese revolution, the internet was shut down, in Ethiopia during the Tigray conflict, in Uganda during national elections, and most recently in Senegal over political unrest and protests.
It appears social media and internet access is a threat to national security mainly when the majority of voices are against the government in power and therefore the first impulse is to restrict it in order to limit free speech and to better control the narrative.
However, the study found that as censorship increases so do pushback against it, as well as many advocacy civil groups monitoring and researching the issues such as Access Now.
Tony Roberts, a research fellow at the Institute of Development Studies and co-author of the study, said that "this digital authoritarianism has fundamental implications for democratic societies, that’s why it's so important that we raise awareness and build capacity across Africa to promote and protect citizens' digital rights." Internet penetration in sub-Saharan Africa has increased to 25% of the population in 2019 compared to less than 1% in 2000, making it an increasingly powerful platform on the continent.
According to the UN, internet shutdowns are a violation of human rights.
These restrictions are a disproportionate measure in combating national security threats, whereas there are less restrictive and more reasonable measures available to achieve this purpose.
Therefore, given the surrounding context, internet and social media restrictions in Africa are rarely done solely for the purpose of national security, hence the Misbar team finds the claim false.
