Session
Organizer 1: Valeria Betancourt, Association for Progressive Communications
Organizer 2: Maria Paz Canales, đź”’ Global Partners Digital
Speaker 1: Aymen Zaghdoudi, Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 2: Jacqueline Rowe, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: Adeboye Adegoke, Civil Society, African Group
Annelies Riezebos, Government, WEOG
Maria Paz Canales, Civil Society, Western European and Others (WEOG)
Ian Barber, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Roundtable
Duration (minutes): 60
Format description: Because the core of the session is interchange of experiences and strategic dialogue for collective action.
A. In what ways are cybercrime laws and digital platform regulations restricting free expression in the Middle East and Africa regions? B. What sorts of enabling environments allow governments in the region to develop and enforce rights-restricting cyber legislation? C. What policy levers, international mechanisms, advocacy strategies or collaborations have been effective in resisting this trend of censorship?
What will participants gain from attending this session? Participants will gain in-depth and up-to-date knowledge on recent trends in digital and cyber regulations which threaten online free expression in Africa and the Middle East. They will hear from a range of local experts who can connect domestic developments to regional trends, and highlight timely pressure points for human rights defenders, CSOs and philanthropists to consider in planning successful advocacy and funding strategies to support civic space and free expression in the Middle East and Africa region. Attendees will also be directed towards the substantive research report for further information.
Description:
In recent years, many countries in the Middle East and Africa have reformed legislation on cybercrime and electronic communications to keep pace with new challenges posed by digital technologies. In some cases, these reforms have served as positive steps towards protecting individuals from malicious cyber activities within a framework of appropriate safeguards, as established by the Budapest Convention. Yet many governments in the region have also implemented legislation which criminalises forms of online expression which should be permissible under international human rights law and standards, and used these laws to crack down on human rights defenders, political dissidents, journalists, LGBTQ+ individuals and other marginalised groups seeking to express themselves online. This not only poses grave threats to individuals’ rights in the digital age, but also diminishes the effectiveness of other open government reforms, slowing progress towards the SDGs. Recent research by Global Partners Digital and Article 19 delves into the misuse of these online content restrictions in Africa and the Middle East, highlighting how these measures have become tools for censorship and analysing recent trends in government responses to digital regulation issues in both regions. This workshop at the Internet Governance Forum would convene experts in digital regulations, media freedoms, and freedom of expression to discuss key findings, including case studies from countries of particular concern and consideration of how these restrictions impact platforms' moderation strategies in the region. The discussion will also consider the influence of international and regional cyber and digital policy processes on national legislative agendas in the region, as well as successful advocacy strategies employed by civil society organizations, philanthropists, media unions, and human rights defenders to push back against the repressive laws in focus.
Insights and feedback gathered on the research at the event will inform future advocacy work on this topic by activists and human rights defenders in the Middle East and Africa region. The session would be useful in identifying a more diverse and wider set of actors that could benefit from knowledge, practical advice and a solidarity network with freedom of expression experts and online platforms teams for the benefit of their own work on the ground.
Hybrid Format: We anticipate we will have a mix of onsite and online speakers. We will ensure interaction between onsite and online attendees by requesting questions throughout the session and ensuring the online moderator has time to actively bring into the discussion inputs and questions shared in the chat function by online attendees. We will ensure the best possible experience for online and onsite participants as it will build in time for input by participants in all the modalities prompted by the onsite and online moderators’ coordination and the constant monitoring of the chat function. The moderators will coordinate and play an active role by encouraging dialogue and posing questions and comments shared in the chat function. We will make use of other tools, if available, such as polls, to engage the audience.
Report
Cybercrime laws and platform regulations in Africa and the Middle East are increasingly being used as tools for repression, particularly through vague and overly broad provisions and restrictions on online content. This undermines freedom of expression and contradicts international human rights law
Cybercrime laws and online content regulations must balance legitimate state concerns, such as tackling cybercrime and illegal content, with a human rights-based approach. This requires clear, transparent, proportionate and rights-respecting frameworks with safeguards to prevent misuse for censorship
Successful civil society advocacy in Africa and the Middle East demonstrates the power of multi-stakeholder collaboration and the need to engage diverse stakeholders in developing effective and future-proofed frameworks which contain meaningful protections for human rights
Stakeholders such as civil society organisations, human rights defenders, and online platforms should deepen collaboration and engage new actors, including through coalitions, to share strategies and amplify efforts to challenge restrictive cybercrime laws and content regulations.
Stakeholders must build awareness and advocate for rights-respecting implementation of the UN Convention on Cybercrime and other cybercrime international frameworks to ensure that emerging national laws align with international human rights standards
Session Overview
The session explored regional trends in digital regulations, focusing on cybercrime laws and platform regulations and their impacts on freedom of expression. Key objectives included fostering collaboration among stakeholders, identifying advocacy strategies, and highlighting rights-respecting approaches. The session drew on insights from the report "An Ever-Tightening Net" by Global Partners Digital and ARTICLE 19.
Annelies Riezebos, Senior Policy Officer Freedom of Expression Online, Department of Multilateral Institutions and Human Rights, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Netherlands opened the session, introduced speakers and covered the main objectives, including to foster understanding of regional trends and impacts on freedom of expression, as well as practical strategies for advocacy and collaboration amongst stakeholders.
Jacqueline Rowe - Trends in Cybercrime and Platform Regulation
- Provided overview of the report, which analysed 150 legal frameworks across Africa and MENA regions.
- Found diverse approaches to cybercrime laws, many diverging from international human rights law (IHRL) standards.
-
Identified key themes or trends:
- Public Order/ Security Narratives: Used to justify speech restrictions but often weaponised against political opponents and activists.
- Disinformation Restrictions: Over a third of frameworks criminalise disinformation inconsistent with IHRL.
- Authoritarian Value Systems: Restrictions targeting LGBTQ+ content, criticism of religious or cultural norms, and advocacy by marginalised groups.
- Platform Regulation Trends: Imposing criminal liability on platforms for failure to take action against content.
- Recommendations:
- Align restrictions with IHRL.
- Avoid criminalising content such as disinformation or offensive language, opting for proportionate policy responses.
- Emphasise holistic approaches considering market, socio-technical, and algorithmic pressures.
Aymen Zaghdoudi - Tunisia’s Cybercrime Decree advocacy experience
- Tunisia’s Cybercrime Decree (2022):
- Enacted following a coup, the decree includes provisions undermining privacy and freedom of expression.
- Article 24 criminalises vague categories of content with disproportionate penalties (5–10 years imprisonment).
- Laws such as these across MENA used to prosecute journalists, lawyers, students, and politicians critical of the government.
- Advocacy Efforts:
- Engaging with states that support human rights to not cooperate with states on content restrictions, parliamentarians to amend problematic provisions, and capacity building with judges and lawyers to ensure FoE cases align with IHRL.
Adeboye Adegoke - Trends in Africa
- Cybercrime laws and others are frequently weaponised against human rights defenders and activists, similar to MENA.
- Example: Nigeria's misuse of cybercrime laws to suppress dissent and provided examples of corruption resulting in charges brought against individuals for exposing, and then new charges when it came to light that criminal defamation provision is not valid.
- Successful Advocacy examples:
- Advocacy in Nigeria and Sierra Leone led to the decriminalization of defamation and cyberstalking.
- CSOs leveraged regional courts like ECOWAS to challenge restrictive provisions in Nigeria Cybercrime law.
Roundtable Dialogue Key Insights
1. Impact of Restrictive Cybercrime Laws:
- Chilling Effects:
- Laws create fear, leading to self-censorship, particularly among marginalized groups and during elections.
- In Tunisia, media professionals avoid political commentary; voter turnout has plummeted.
2. Emerging Trends and Risks:
- Restrictive trends exacerbated by vague cybercrime laws.
- Positive developments include collaboration among CSOs and international coalitions to push back, as seen with UNCC.
3. Suggested strategies for Advocacy moving forward:
- Participate in early policy discussions to influence outcomes.
- Use of national or regional courts if available to challenge restrictive laws and set precedents.
- Equip stakeholders with knowledge and tools to defend FoE.
- Encourage funders to support ad-hoc and sustainable CSO engagement.
- Strengthen coalitions between CSOs, international organisations, governments and particularly the private sector.
Moderator’s Closing Note: Thanks to all speakers and attendees for contributing actionable insights and fostering dialogue on these critical issues.