According to news reports from at least two sources seen by the Centre for Multilateral Affairs (CfMA), government has reportedly directed telecom companies to switch off internet, mobile money and voice calls on January 14th as Uganda goes in for polls. Quoting a letter authored by government, the sources say government asked Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to switch off WhatsApp, Twitter, Facebook and WTF.
They quote “Mobile data services (Country wide)-Excluding NON-GSM, Mobile data service (Regional cluster) Excluding NON-GSM, Mobile data services (Country wide) including NON-GSM, and mobile data (Regional cluster) including NON-GSM” reads the directive according to sources.
Other services to be blocked that have been listed by another online news platform are “Voice, SMS and Data (country wide and full network shutdown, Voice, SMS and Data (Network shutdown on Regional cluster). Data (country wide excluding dedicated APN, Data (Regional cluster excluding dedicated APN and finally MOMO services both country wide and regional cluster”
In August 2020, the CfMA wrote that it is evident through research that internet shutdowns and state violence go hand in hand. In fact, it projected then that, another internet shutdown was likely to occur in the country especially as election time drew nearer. Today, we face the challenge of another looming internet shutdown as Ugandans goes to polls on January 14th 2021.
The history of internet shutdown in Uganda is not new. It dates back as early as 2006 and continues after. In the 2006 elections, the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) instructed ISPs to block access to the website of Radio Katwe for publishing ‘malicious and false information’ against the ruling National Resistance Movement and its presidential candidate.
On April 14, 2011, UCC instructed ISPs to temporarily block access to Facebook and Twitter for 24 hours to eliminate connecting and sharing of information. The order came in the heat of opposition-led “walk to work” protests over rising fuel and food prices. The reason given by the regulating committee was to prevent violence.
In the 2016 general elections, social media platforms were shut down twice by the Ugandan authorities. The first shutdown happened on February 18, 2016, on the eve of the presidential election. The restrictions lasted for four full days.
Another shutdown happened on May 11, 2016, where social media platforms including Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter and mobile money transfer services were once again blocked.
President Museveni in 2016 reportedly told journalists he ordered the social media blocking so that “steps must be taken for security to stop so many getting into trouble, its temporary because some people use those pathways for telling lies”.
Civil Society organizations – through its coalition body the #Keepiton spearheaded by Accessnow and others including the CfMA is submitting a letter urging government authorities to restrain from shutting down internet to ensure increased participation and transparency in election.
The letter stressed that “research has shown that internet shutdowns and violence go hand in hand.[1] & [2]Shutting down internet during elections limits citizens’ participation in the electoral process. By disrupting the free flow of information, shutdowns only serve to heighten existing tensions in the society and negatively affect reporting capacity with regard to human rights violations”.
In addition, without access to communication tools, journalists, media workers, and human rights defenders are unable to report on the election process.[3] Internet shutdowns also affect people’s ability to access key information at a crucial moment in a democracy, damaging their capacity to make informed choices. There are also higher chances of the spread of misinformation, as there are fewer reliable channels for fact-checking during a shutdown’’
Uganda has ratified regional and international frameworks such as the legally-binding International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, which provide for the protection and promotion of the rights of freedom of opinion and expression and access to information, both offline and online.
The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) Resolution from 2016 recognizes the “importance of the internet in advancing human and people’s rights in Africa, particularly the right to freedom of information and expression.” The ACHPR/Res. 362 (LIX) 2016 also condemns the “emerging practice of State Parties interrupting or limiting access to telecommunication services such as the internet, social media, and messaging services.”[4]
In its joint letter urging Ugandan authorities to restrain from blocking internet, the Civil Society groups asserts that ‘research indicates that there is no evidence that shutdowns are effective at achieving a legitimate aim; if anything, by trying to achieve their ends, the government will often block their own channels of information.[5] Additionally, UN experts and high-level officials — including the UN Secretary-General — formally affirm that , “blanket Internet shutdowns and generic blocking and filtering of services are considered by United Nations human rights mechanisms to be in violation of international human rights law.”[6]’
According to a recent report produced by the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) entitled “Dialing In the Law: A Comparative Assessment of Jurisprudence on Internet Shutdowns’’ the 2017 report by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council looks at illegal internet communication shutdowns.
The report argues that states and governments are increasingly relying on telecommunications companies, internet service providers and other actors to cut access to the internet and monitor expression online.
Given this environment, the report charts out a series of measures that the digital access industry can undertake to identify, prevent and mitigate risks to freedom of expression caused due to internet shutdowns. The report references Human Rights Council resolution 32/13 which condemned measures that sought to intentionally prevent or disrupt access to or the dissemination of information online.
[1]An internet shutdown is defined as an intentional disruption of internet or electronic communications, rendering them inaccessible or effectively unusable, for a specific population or within a location, often to exert control over the flow of information. See more at:<https://www.accessnow.org/keepiton-faq/#Shutdowns-and-impact>
[2]Anita R. Gohdes, ‘Pulling the Plug: Network Disruptions and Violence in the Syrian Conflict’ (Journal of Peace Research: 31 January 2014) <http://www.anitagohdes.net/uploads/2/7/2/3/27235401/gohdes_synetworkaug14.pdf>
[3]Jonathan Rozen, ‘Journalists under duress: Internet shutdowns in Africa are stifling press freedom’ (Africa Portal: 17 August 2017) <https://www.africaportal.org/features/journalists-under-duress-internet-shutdowns-africa-are-stifling-press-freedom/ >
[4]African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, (November 2016) ‘362: Resolution on the Right to Freedom of Information and Expression on the Internet in Africa – ACHPR/Res. 362(LIX) 2016’<http://www.achpr.org/sessions/59th/resolutions/362/>
[5]Anita R. Ghodes, ‘Repression Technology: Internet Accessibility and State Violence’ (American Journal of Political Science)<https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.ezproxy.cul.columbia.edu/doi/full/10.1111/ajps.12509>
[6]UN Secretary-General’s ‘Digital Cooperation Roadmap, (May 2020)’ <https://undocs.org/A/74/821> See also Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), ‘Joint declaration by the United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, the Organization of American States (OAS) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, on Freedom of Expression and Responses to Conflict Situations’ (4 May 2015) <https://www.osce.org/fom/154846>.
