The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Good morning everyone joining us in person and online. And good afternoon or evening to those connecting from different time zone. For people present in the room, you can wear the headset to hear us better. Both us and people online. My name is Ottavia and I work as an (?) expert at the UNICRI, the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute. We are we are thankful for your time and interest in this session titled From Research to Action: Cybercrime & Justice in Africa.
Very quickly during this session, we will launch our research report just published today. Title access to justice in the digital age, empowering victims of cybercrime in Africa. We are going to present its main findings, learn from speakers about many topics from the common trend in cybercrimes and the online crimes targeting African countries and the challenges the national law enforcement agencies face in conducting investigations and the obstacles victims encounter in reporting cybercrimes and/or online crimes and seeking fair redress.
Then we'll aim to address recommendations and what gaps we can fill in as a multistakeholder community and what practical solutions we could improve our develop as next step.
We will conclude the sessions with expert feedback and expertise, including, of course, questions for our speakers. This work falls within UNICRI work stream on cybercrime and online harms, which aims to explore the interplay of different cyber threats and harmful behaviors, seeking to develop inclusive and rights-based solutions to address the convergence of cybercrimes and online harms, including terrorism, bioterrorism online, gender-based violence, child abuse and exploitation and hate speech.
At UNICRI, we address these threats through research in each thematic areas but also capacity-building activities involving tech companies. And technical assistance to member states and policy making.
Of course I would like to thank our great speakers for their time today and their direct contribution to the report we are launching. We just published. Let me quickly introduce them for you all. So we have Tina Power. She's director of ALT Advisory and an attorney of the High Court of South Africa. Michael Ilishebo, digital forensic analyst and cybercrime investigator with the Zambia police. And then online, we have Sandra Aceng. Thanks a lot for joining us online. Executive director at World Net (?), Women Uganda Network. And we are waiting for another online speaker who might join us soon, Belford Doherty, who is cyber policy analyst and head of IT at the financial intelligence agency in Sierra Leone. Last but not at least, my colleague Odhran, program management officer, an officer in New York, he is joining as an online moderator. To all online participants, of course, leave your comments and questions and feedback in the chat. And we'll go through it during the Q&A.
Logistically speaking before opening the floor to participants we will have two rounds of questions for our speakers to firstly set is scene and secondly, to discuss recommendations opportunities and next steps.
And I think we can just start. So my very first question is for Tina. So as the main author of this report we are launching today, could you please share with us the main findings of this report? Thank you.
>> TINA POWER: Thanks, Ottavia. Good morning, everyone, maybe just a quick good morning to all of the early birds who joined us in person. And we appreciate a slightly chillier morning and it's been a busy week so thank you for being here.
And welcome to those online as well. We know that colleagues are joining from different time zones and we appreciate that everyone put in the effort. And thank you to the technical team in the back who made this event possible. We really appreciate, thank you very much.
As a point of departure, it's important to note while many themes we will be discussing today may be familiar what set this is report apart is its focus on Africa, which is somewhat unique given we are launching in Norway but we don't often talk about infrastructure from a cybercrime perspective. So that's important. And it's victim centred in nature. We are not talking about hacks of big banks. We are talking about the live experiences of ordinary salespeople who are victims of cybercrime. And it's inform I by a diverse stakeholders and which is why the panel is unique, we have UN agencies and government. And it was informed by everyone's perspectives and views.
Lastly it's geared to finding practical solutions to present challenges. Quite simply the report isn't set to explain to us what cybercrimes are. but it's set to explain how people are affected and why so many remain without justice. There's a lot to unpack in the report but I'll go over four overarching findings we found over four countries, South Africa, Namibia, Sierra Leone, and Uganda. The first finding is we know that cybercrime is on the rise in Africa but we don't yet have the full picture.
Secondly there's a disparity in people understanding. There's various forms of cybercrime.
Thirdly, certain cybercrimes in inherently gendered in nature. And finally we are seeing deep structure barriers that are hindering access to justice. I'll briefly take us through these.
First we know that cybercrime is on the crime we have seen this in data and emerging details from stakeholders and. We don't have the full details new and there's understood reporting and Sandra will report on that. But people victims of cybercrime don't often know they are affected by a crime or even if they know it was a crime they don't know how to report or phrase what happened to them.
There's person types of online harm like the nonconsensual share of images and a lot of women feel there's a stigma in reporting and they'll be blamed or revictimized and that hinders the reporting. And in many instances we have seen the font line office at police stations aren't equipped to discuss these crimes they don't foe how what words to use and how to talk it be crime which hinders the process.
Where the data exists it's helpful and we can see the trends and pick it up. But we need to do more to capture the what the reality is. Because it means we are tackling somewhat of a invisible problem. And this doesn't mean the harms aren't real but they aren't currently captured on the system. And secondly and this licks to the capturing the report highlights the distinction between financial harm and personal harm. Financial harm is a harm where you have scammed or hacked and someone stole your monies. And this is the personal harm which is more intimate. The sharing of images and being boxed and hate speech.
The distinction is how it's responded to. If you report a financial crime or report a threat there's a more quicker response and immediate response. Where reporting personal crimes are more intimate and more domestic in nature and not taken as seriously. So the distension between the two types of crime is importantly.
Second to last the gendered nature of the crimes came through incredibly strong in the research and with stakeholders on the ground. Where there are instances of harassment and doxing and intimate images this is intimate in nature and it's clear the women are disproportionally effected a as well as people in the LGBTQ community.
Finally there's structural barriers hindering access toll report cybercrimes. There's either a patch work of laws or laws out dated and we are seeing law enforcement systems are often under capacitated in Africa and resources are not directed towards these institutions but it would be nice to hear from Michael as someone playing the role in the institutions what type of capacity we need.
We see that both victims and front line responders are lacking knowledge how to navigate cybercrime and cybercrime legislation. And we are also seeing that people don't recognize this as a crime, which then means they are not reporting. Ultimately, the report has made it clear that cybercrimes is not just a technical issue it's a justice issue. If we don't have correct avenues for justice, victims and survivors will not be able to seek recourse, we will lack accountability. And we will not be able to move forward as a continent where people are safe and protected particularly online. Thank you, Ottavia.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Thank you, Tina. That was a fantastic introduction to the report we are publishing today and to the conversation and discussion of today. So now I would like to move to you, Michael. And get your perspective as law enforcement. So could you please share with us what do you think are the main challenges law enforcement authority face with cybercrime investigations today? Thank you.
>> MICHAEL ILISHEBO: Good morning, Ottavia, and good morning my fellow panelists and those in this room and those online. So basically, as a law enforcement officer from Africa and also one of the law enforcement officers in the world who is trying at all costs to at all cost we have a safer cyber space for all. Cyber has no jurisdictional borders. From the Africa perspective, the challenges are many. Cybercrime comes in amount first way. What I mean is in almost every crime that is committed today has elements of digital evidence. Digital evidence is highly policed using the cyber laws. So we find a situation where almost all traditional forms of crime that used to happen in the past are more prominent now because of the use of ICT. Just as the increase in the nominal traditional crime is on the rise, we have seen cybercrime coming on the rise.
Among the many challenges we are facing as African law enforcers is the first part of it is the lack of capacity in terms of the queues. When you talk about cybercrime investigation, the process starts with a person reports. In this case, it's also an increase in under reporting of these cases. Most cases that happen, people fail to report them to the police, not because they don't want to report them but because they know that either by the time ‑‑ by even if they report they may not get sufficient help. Second is because as she put it. It could not be a crime that has been committed for not just financial gain by person gain. Performance who want to take their privacy private. And knowing if I go to a police station they may not handle my case in a private manner where manages of a sexual nature or anything may affect my standing in society. And day don't report these cases.
At a politician level the suspect is arrested and arraigned in a court of law. If the police are failing to handle some of these cases due to queues what happens in the court? The same scenario happens in the court. Both from the (?) side and justice side. In terms of capacity building it must be done in a way that would not only capacitate the police alone capacitate judicially which is both the prosecutors and the judges. So also, we've seen an increase in terms of the nature of which cybercrime is happening due to use of AI.
We have seen people who may not know how to code and frame this and that we are using AI to enhance their criminal skills and. Third also the use of encryption whatever to hide what is on their laptop or device using encryption and that may delay the way justice is enforced.
Third also the use of cryptocurrency. You have seen a situation where criminals don't have to rely on cash. For them to commit a crime they hide under the crypto barrier. In the Africa and in the U.S. there was a group formed called Africa cryptocurrency group which is under the U.S. Department of Justice, attached to the AU. There's 8 countries and more countries will be joining we are trying to tackle the issues of cryptocurrency. So thirdly it's an issue of legal frameworks. So fight cybercrime we start with domestic laws.
And then international conventions. Most of African countries are not part of the Convention but the UN came up with a draft of the convention of the cybercrime by nature in African country which is a member of the UN may in a way or one way or the other may find themselves signing to the UN convention when it is signed, I think it will be signed in October in Vietnam.
Then of course the process will start and all those. So that will be an easy way for the member states in Africa to be part of the convention. And we have the convention on the protection on cybercrime. But in order to address the increasing cybercrime.
And the Budapest Convention, which has been around 20 years but last time I checked there's 15 or 12 African countries attached to the Budapest convention. This is critical for us to get information when it comes to cases or criminals out of the jurisdiction of Africa. So that brings up the issue of jurisdiction. We have seen an increase of crimes that may not in places where they don't a cybercrime laws in place.
If your country has a poor cybercrime restriction someone from another country may cause financial or emotional harm and yet in that country it's not a crime. So we have seen so many challenges such that if I were to list them here there are almost all the challenges we are facing but I will say these are part of the most critical challenges we are facing.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Thanks a lot, Michael, for this overview and snapshot, detailed snapshot to the different challenges law enforcement may face with regards to cybercrime investigation. Something interesting you mentioned mentioning the rise of cybercrime with AI, something we have seen via different research is that AI is really not creating new criminals. It's actually allowing criminals in other fields moving into the cybercrime environment, which is a bit concerning because, yeah, I think we can all agree that AI reduce the level of barrier into everything that is technical. So thanks for bringing that up as well.
Moving forward, I would love to come to you, Sandra. I hope you hear me, we see you, that's fantastic. To you, given the your line of work and the important work you do, I would like to focus more on the victim side. So we would love to hear from you. What are the obstacles that victims encounter in reporting cybercrime online harms and in seeking fair redress, particularly from a gendered perspective, thanks to you.
>> SANDRA ACENG: Thank you so much for that question. Can you confirm that you can hear me?
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: We can hear you.
>> SANDRA ACENG: Okay, it would be lovely to be in that room but nonetheless I am joining virtually and good morning and good afternoon and may be evening for everyone and for some other people joining as well. Very glad to be speaking about this subject. So based on the work that we have done at women of Uganda network, looking at some of the obstacles that victims encounter, especially women and gender minority groups they face a lot of challenges especially in being able to report.
But also being able to seek redress, which sometimes in most cases is shaped by social stigma and sometimes institutional gaps and also digital illiteracy as clearly highlighted by Michael. So I would go deep into it. So one of the obstacles has been stigma and the fear of public shaming, whereby women who experience tech facilitated gender based violence such as nonconsensual tricks of intimate images in Uganda is referred to usually as revenge porn and cyber stalking and doxing they are feared of being blamed or ridicules and then there's the cultural norm that is a discourage women from speaking out, especially when the abuse is sexual in nature and also intimate in nature.
There's this case in 2022 when we documented during our study a young woman in the northern part of Uganda had an intimate images leaked by an ex‑partner so rather her reporting it, she withdrew from social media and also isolated herself. So when she reported this case to women of Uganda network, she expressed fear of being judged by police and also her community.
So when the case was handled confidentially through the toll free line. But we never really pursued for more justice as well. And then also talking about the aspect of limited literacy and also awareness of rights, whereby many victims, especially, those in the rural women and youth do not report online crimes or unaware of their available legal protections.
So a lack of awareness, of, for example, a data protection law or the computer misuse act amendment in 2022 or the Uganda police cybercrime units also limits reporting. Still an example during a workshop that we conducted in a district based in northern Uganda, it's also found about 80% of the participants, majority of which were women, had never heard of what Uganda did to digital protection and privacy act. So many believe that online reporting was maybe for those who have strong political views or financial connection. So you can see really so there's also a bit of lack of awareness in regards to that.
And then also talking about the weak law and the enforcement response aspect of it. You find victims also face a very dismissive attitudes from police, especially when the harm is online and not physical. And a serious case we actually recently was reported to our police through one of our partner whereby her private and intimate images were unlawfully shared in multiple WhatsApp groups and we were able to identify a group without consent. So she strongly believed that these images were taken by a former boyfriend, which was also named. But I'll keep it private for this.
So as she was ‑‑ he was the only person with access to her at that state. And she also stated it took photos without consent. So she reported this case to the central police stations of Kampala and all the details are registered as unsolicited information under the misuse act of is the 96. So she was deeply very concerned that more content would be shared and also as she and also the ex‑partner also engaged in intimate activities in the (?) which had assisted to a camera which he had sole access to. But the police department help her because she didn't have enough evidence. So we provided her support with having screenshots which we were able to share. And also if she has direct access to the WhatsApp group, which she didn't have but a friend has access to the WhatsApp group and also belonged to WhatsApp group but she couldn't report this case because the friend could not report it.
It needed someone in the WhatsApp group to be able to report. And I was looking through the rules in the WhatsApp group which says if you are quiet in the WhatsApp group you will be able to be excluded and all that. So you can see the aspect of law enforcement that lacks specific trainings, especially to tech facilitated gender based violence is still lacking. And the investigation of the law and also inclusive. So this requires a lot of training to be done.
And also linked to that also are universities student also reported that cyber bullying and defamation via Facebook outcomes to her local police in Lira district based in northern Uganda. And the police asked her to present the suspect who was anonymous and then they told her to deactivate her account. Through the legal network we were able to link them to the law for digital legal support. But for formal justice was not pursued. So you find that's lot of issue that continue to happens.
Also with the legal frameworks and gender sensitive provision that is a we have, this continue to happen. In the case of Uganda we have no specific law in Uganda that address technology facilitated gender based violence, although we have the African commission of human and peoples right resolution, 522, which talks about the protection of women against digital violence in Africa. It still something that the recognizes online gender based violence as a human right and this is a step and it's also calling for all the member states countries to be able to work together to ensure that we have specific laws that address digital violence as a whole. So I would like to stop here and back to you, thank you.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Thanks a lot, Sandra, for sharing different unfortunately different example of cases related to cybercrime or online harms and with gender based violence component as well. Your perspective is very much needed this this type of conversation.
So now we set a bit of scene of what is happening and what are the different challenges, the different sectors within this topic address. So perhaps we can move into recommendations, opportunities and next steps. And then of course open it to the floor. Both in onsite and online floor. So coming back to you, Tina. Given your role as a attorney as well and you are very strong legal background what can you share with us on the legislative aspects? How can we use legislative instruments to advance and prevention of cybercrime and online harms? Thank you.
>> TINA POWER: Thanks, Ottavia, if there's ever a question to get a lawyer excited it's the values of laws so I'll keep it brief. And ill touch why laws matter and how the right laws can lead to tangible results and what we can do to make our laws better.
A finding of the report is good laws matter for several reasons. They provide a clear definition and guidance to what the crime is and the options you are. It is essential for both the public understanding of what the law means and what justice means as well for how the justice system will unfold once it's been reported.
Laws also given victims a legal basis to seek redress and ensure there's accountability. And a well‑drafted piece of legislation lays the foundation for action.
Yet enables us to know what to do from the moment of reporting which we now heard multiple times is a clear challenge, through to investigation also there are complications, then to the actual justice level. Once we get to court what is going to happen? So law gives that foundation which is much needed.
Without laws and clear guidance which is grounded in human rights, victims will remain vulnerable and access to justice will remain limited.
South Africa cybercrime act provides a useful example of a law. I won't say it is good but it does tick many of the boxes. It addresses financial and personal harms. It provide institutional guidance. And requires the development of more sort of operational requirements such adds standing operational procedures. How do we gather the evidence, how do we store the evidence and use the evidence in court?
What I would like to emphasize here is the real world power of legislation. Having the right legal framework can tangibly support victims of various forms of cybercrimes. And I'm going to share a few examples in some work that we have done recently. We issued several cease and desist letters in South Africa they are called letters of demand in the case of the threat of disclosure of the intimate images. The image hasn't been disclosed but it's a threat of disclosure
In the letter by referencing the cybercrime act and stating what the criminal sanctions are we found it's a useful deterrent to stop the harm in its tracks when people see there is a real legal harm or real legal risk at play they genuine genuinely tended to stop in our experience.
This is an important remind their the threat of accountability can be a strong deterrent. A second successful example we had was using South Africa's protection from harassment act. And here we use it to obtain what we call an protection order and in other jurisdictions it's known as a restraining order. And we achieve this on behalf of the human rights defender who was relentlessly attacked on X and threatened with real world violence.
Fortunately for us our act pertains to threats in the online realm so in the offline realm
We went to a judge and arm argued how a harm would come in the online and real world. And we got protection that way. And the law can provide justice but the law needs to be good and well crafted and the definitions need to be clear. And the accountability and reporting mechanism also need to be clear.
One useful thing about the UNICRI report is we don't stop there and say you need good laws. We want to figure out how we can make good laws. We set up a set of recommendations a part of which proposals that states undergo a legislative audit to identify gaps and overlap and areas of concern at the country level. Each country assesses where they are at. Do we have overlapping laws or missing fundamental laws? Do we not have a law yet? Like in Namibia they haven't passed it so the victims were without redress.
we coupled with a cybercrime law that's victim centred and we have seen cybercrime model law around the world but we have one that is yet to be seen as victim centered how do we have a law that effect that protects the people affected?
We have the law in two forms. To set up the audit to identify where the challenges are and to gill the gaps and this is what the model law could look like applied to your jurisdiction and see if it work
And I'm sure my colleagues will address this, law is not enough. This needs to be coupled with training with actors so they know how to I apply the law. And we are embarking on a Know Your Rights campaign so the ordinary member of the public can know they have been a victim of a cybercrime and how to report and what the reporting process look likes. So we want good laws but we also want people to use the laws. It's unhelpful having a good piece of legislation but no one knows how to use it or how to access it.
In summary and in closing because I see our time is moving on, I will caveat all of this as lawyers generally tend to do to say that legislation is a foundation. It is not the finish line. For our laws to be effective, they need to be clear, they need to be grounded in human rights and they need to be well communicated both to members of the public and those within the justice system. This needs to be equally coupled with institutional capacity. And capacity has come time and again both from Sandra and Michael and we know there's a challenge there and the laws need to be able to support that and enable that. When all is said and done as a lawyer I see huge potential and value in the law and it is one of the solutions.
It is an important one and it does provide us with what we need to take us forward but it needs to be coupled with everything else we discussed today as we. Thank you, Ottavia.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Thanks to you, Tina. I think that's the perspective of having not just legislative framework by the right legislative framework is a key message here.
Michael, back to you again from law enforcement perspective. Where do you think we should focus our efforts in enhancing law enforcement capabilities towards tackling cybercrime? Perhaps if we can get your views on one of the recommendation is in the report is the use of clear coding systems for cybercrime investigations. If you could share anything on this, this would be helpful, thank you.
>> MICHAEL ILISHEBO: So basically I'll pick it up from the previous speaker. You see, when you embark on a know your right campaign, to focus on victims specific laws, what we've discovered is like from my experience from Zambia experience is in my country those laws are there. That actually protect the victim. But unfortunately, the civil society coming up on saying some of these laws are meant to stifle freedom of expression.
As much as the government, as much as the laws would want to speak life into the protection of the victims, somehow others would feel their freedom of expression has been hampered. So that's one of the challenges we need to find a balance.
So coming to the question. So some of the recommendations or working solution that is a we need in order for us to address, fight, and mitigate of course you cannot completely stop cybercrime, you can only mitigate it. Is the first part is as I alluded is on capacity building. Not only the police but also the justice system. The wheel of justice starts with the law enforcement, end with the courts.
So once we tailor in some courses and specific to the needs of these players in the justice system, or at least be able to address and mitigate some of these cases, this is a case probably took 6 months to be disposed of in court can be done in under 2 weeks and second is public‑private partnership. We need a clear guideline and clear consensus and on the private and public. Most skills and most infrastructure lies in the hands of the private sector. I will give an example. We got social media platforms.
Where some of these I would say both financial and non‑financial cases or offenses happen. Sometimes for the request of request of information from the service providers, I won't name them, but you know them. They will tell you this is against our community guidelines. What has community guidelines have got to do with an act that is a offense in your jurisdiction? In that case they may not be able to give you the information you are seeking for. An image may be posted of someone online.
You can request for it to be pulled down. They will say this does not go against our community guidelines. So we need a balance and a guidelines and a clear consensus to have a situation where it may not go against their guidelines but as long as the victim feels not safe, imbalanced or publicly shamed by that image these platforms need to bring down the content. And also the law enforcement agency the request for information there's need for them to act swiftly to give the law enforcers the information they are after. As long as we meet the basic criteria of a subpoena or a court order or anything they defend.
Once we address the issue of public
Private partnership we halfway solved the problem. And also there's the issue of enhanced legal framework. I'll give you an example for Zambia. Just two months ago we amended our cyber security cybercrime act being making the act a single lease of legislation and enhancing the act. We have come a long way in addressing cybercrime.
But again if you look at the current law it is able to address what challenges we are facing now. But does that mean in two or three years time the same position will be as effective as it is now. So the process of enhanced legal frameworks has to always be a continuous work. A cyber law has a shelf life. The Penal Code that was enacted 50 years ago and the same applies today.
Enhanced legal frameworks which as opposed to meant to each other. Meaning if we have immediate cybercrime act in Africa where an offense in Kenya and Zambia speak to the same facts. Where instead of in Zambia and you go to Kenya it's not an offense. Maybe in the case is in Zambia and the victim is in Kenya. The damage was done in Zambia but the victim is in Kenya. But when you search the cyber in the crime in Kenya it is not. So it's an arrangement there.
If the law is clear in terms of speaking life to each other, that way, I can ensure your we are going to probably do cybercrime by a huge percentage because anyone in any African country will know what I am doing is an offense where the victim in Africa or anywhere else. And among these recommendations we need to avail cyber registration.
Also I alluded already to the aspect of international conventions. I said the later African countries are part of the Budapest convention and not Ned the UNICRI convention which needs to be signed. I think the we need to push for the Africa countries to be part of these conventions. The cyber knows no borders or jurisdictions. It's not of respect to anyone. And the crime here could be committed by someone in Colombia or Zambia. So how do we address these issues is for us to meet somewhere through international treaty. Thank you.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Thanks to you, Michael. And thanks for the different oversight and for recommendations in general. I also really appreciate you introducing the public‑private partnership debacle. It's something that's very hard to tackle. I think probably everybody in the room and also online have a face this issue in one way or the other.
Before moving into questions and feedback from participants, we would like to come back to you, Sandra, for again we are looking into recommendations. So perhaps your view on recommendations on how we can effect I feel support victims of these types of crimes and again with a particular attention to the needs of women and girls. Thank you.
>> SANDRA ACENG: Thank you for the question. Can you hear me?
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Yes.
>> SANDRA ACENG: Okay so I will start from where Tina Power stopped. She said the law is not enough. And I would like to say you cannot fix what is broken by tech using the law. However, we also need the law. So for many recommendation, I would say there's need as also Michael highlighted there's a need to strengthen the legal and policy framework. And enact specific law that is a speaks about online gender based violence or technology facilitated gender based violence. And these laws should be able to explicitly cover issues around non‑consensual intimate images or videos. Cyber stalk stalks and doxing and online harassment and. More importantly the AI generated sexual content referred to as deep fakes and now we also have deep fakes. And also the gender disinformation that's linked to AI generated content.
And also speaking about the law, we can also see how to integrate gender sensitive provisions, especially into ICT legislation e ensure that laws such a it has computer misuse act is viewed and amended to prevent misuse and also ensure the protection of actually survivors not just because of who you are in the society but everyone is being supported. And also I was also shared some of the domestic laws with the international instruments. And specifically the issues that talk about women rights and also building institutional capacity and accountability. How do we ensure that we train law enforcement the prosecutors the judicial officers on digital crimes with a gender links include models especially on trauma‑informed survivor supports. Ensure the digital violence, ensure that also we have an inclusion of online investigation techniques that is build or taught to these people.
And also establishing delegated technology facilitated gender based violence response. Especially at the police post with a female officers and also with digital crimes expats and also monitor enforcements to ensure that justice for survivors is being guaranteed and not further victimization. And also the need to have expand access to survivor centered support services. How do we develop and also scale up supports platforms that are available? We have the LGV web portal and it's also to offer support to digital security tips. And also referrals. And also we have the toll free line that helps with the reporting and the emotional support. So how do we scale that and also have mobile clinics especially for psychosocial services in the rural areas because these are the areas most times thought or they do not face these thing.
And ensure there's also multilanguage access. Disability‑inclusive services. So that no cyber is left out. And facilitate also legal aid, free legal aid. Digital security support through partnership with civil society organization and legal tech firms. Again for us to be able to reduce, I would not like to say end because we cannot end but reduce cybercrimes against women and girls we need to have a multistakeholder partnership, which is very key.
And also promote digital literacy. And awareness. And ensure that women and girls have education online safety. And this trainings should be able to focus on managing the privacy settings. Ereck recognizing that online harassment is real. And also the reporting channels and how to digitalize evidence is also being taught. And having community‑based workshops the use of radios and the use of social media. And recently we explored the use of comic books that was impactful. Going to the community and reading to them. A fun way for them to be able to educate themselves on some digital security tips and also being aware that online gender based violence or cybercrime is real.
And integrating some cyber safety and digital rights skills especially into the school curriculum, especially for women and marginalized learners is key. And I would like to conclude and say for us to be able to reduce online gender based violence you have to start thinking of how do we engage boys, men, and also the communities in prevention. How do we challenge harmful gender norms and also misogyny. And having a respectful dialogue on digital behavior and content. And support male champions and peer educators in school and communities and groups that can be models for positive engagement. So we can see how to mitigate the increasing rate of online gender based violence. Thank you.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Thanks to you Sandra for sharing the recommendations and the fantastic ideas. The use of comic books I think it's a very great example how to involve communities as well. So I think we have a bit more than 10 minutes left. So it would be fantastic to come to you all. And thanks again for your interest and time in joining our session. I don't know if there's any questions or comments ‑‑ yes, please, I think you need to go to the mic. Thanks a lot.
>> Thank you, good morning, can you hear me? I am Senator Shriber [sounds like] for (?) from Nigeria. I chaired the committee on ICT and cybercrime. And I'm also the chairman of the West African national internet governance. I'm extremely delighted to be here and listening to the conversation in the last one hour or so. You are speaking about a Nigerian situation from listening to Zambia to Uganda and I've come to the conclusion the issues are fairly the same.
Particularly on African continent. My gentleman spoke about the civil society organization and I think that's why this conversation needs to also extended to civil society organization. Nigeria enacted a cybercrime law in 2015. Last year we amended it. And we also in the process amended it particularly because of the UN convention that just adopted in December.
But the civil society organizations, every time there's an attempt to amend a cybercrime law to protect citizens the civil society organizations are always up in arms believing and thinking it's about to constrain the space . And forgets sometimes where your own rights stop is where somebody else else's starts. So I think we need to bring the civil society organizations into the conversation. And the second point for me. And I spoke about this in the parliamentary track. Unless and until we are able to bring the big tech into the table and I suggest a situation where the Africa as a continent come together. The same thing that happens in Europe.
You have a law in part of Europe the entire Europe will find you. Also and until all the big techno that if you violate the law in South Africa. Our sanction is only available in South Africa. And not in Ghana and Nigeria. That's the only time they respect our national laws and national laws. Right now we are in a place where we made the laws and violate the law and the same content that will bring down in less than one day in Europe, you will be shopping and you happen down the next two weeks meanwhile the victims continue to suffer. And sometimes people go into depression.
I think we need a continental approach to come to the table and say you violate the law. You don't respect the norms here. And that's central to the continent. And thank you for this conversation. And this African issue and it speak to African continent. And I think we need to move from talking about it to having a concerted African position.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Thanks a lot. Senator, that's very important what you are sharing. Both involving civil society and bringing the big tech at the table. I don't know if panelists would like ‑‑ speakers would like to comment?
>> MICHAEL ILISHEBO: So basically, we are getting together of this session. This area put on our challenges not almost are the same. What is ‑‑ what Nigeria is going through is what any other African country is going through. And we will continue the conversations beyond the panel session.
>> TINA POWER: I have one brief comment. I see there's more questions. But on the note of civil society responding to legislation. There's a fine line. What the report recommends and proposals is when we are drafting legislation it must be grounded in human rights. Where there's tensions of freedom of expression of the potential misuse of the act to curb other people's rights we need to strike that balance. And that's why the report suggests any law reform earths must be grounded in immunes and align with the international commitments and particularly the conventions we signed onto as countries and. I appreciate the tension. And it's a difficult one and a fine line to navigate and that's why we want our laws to be grounded in human rights so all human rights are taken into account when drafting the legislation. But I see there's some more questions.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: We will take one more question from the floor and then we have some questions online. Go ahead.
>> Yuri Pokovoy [sounds like] From the Finnish Green Party. It's good it's highlighted the big tech washes their hands of any accountability of monitoring crimes committed everywhere the in the world. But my comment is mostly about the same important raised about civil societies. I originally come from Belarus which is struggling from completely the same issues.
But the civil societies have been basically crushed by the government to do whatever they want. And I just want to remind people that civil societies can kind of be seen as a symptom of public distrust of the government's capabilities and resources to handle these issues. And they should really be worked together with even if they are annoying to compromise with on the cyber law. But yeah. My question is mostly about what's the view of you, Michael, and Tina as a prosecutor and law enforcer on the like weight of public trust in these institutions in ways to handle these situations?
You highlighted about the trust affecting under reporting quite heavily. But is there any specific way you can see that being improved significantly in near future? Thank you.
>> MICHAEL ILISHEBO: So basically as part of enhancing trust between the victims or the citizens is that the Zambia police service in this case taken up a deliberate policy of sensitization through various forms. It could be radio, it could be TV, it could be articles or social media and short videos. And we have a means of which we have to reach out to the citizens. So as much as cyber is demystified in Africa something that's a little bit challenging to a ordinary law enforcement officer, efforts were made through various platforms and engagements to ensure that at least at any given situation at any police station, they may start a case. They may do something. But when it goes beyond the capabilities they are able to reach us at the police headquarters.
We are trying but I hope within the next coming year or two or so we will reach that but it's not something that's easy.
>> I think we could have more questions and I'll talk to them after.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: I will take the two questions online if that's okay with you. Quickly. We have one question on for you, Sandra, specifically on existing mechanism to support victims of crime. And the second question for you, Sandra but also for the other speakers. Is do we have example of countries where countries have enacted and robustly implemented laws against tech facilitated gender based violence? If yes, how did they go about popularizing and implementing them? Thank you, perhaps Sandra if you would like to start, thank you.
>> SANDRA ACENG: Yeah, so the existing mechanism. Where is person from? From which country?
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Um, I think we ‑‑ Emi who asked the question online. But I'm not sure about the country but perhaps ‑‑
>> SANDRA ACENG: So he was just saying he was happy to learn the existing mechanism highlighted by Sandra. So it wasn't a question.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: Then there is a question about ‑‑ yeah, if you know about countries that have enacted and robustly implemented laws against tech facilitated gender based violence.
>> SANDRA ACENG: Okay so that question is asked by Dr. Wakavi [sounds like] which is also my friend and now a partner from Uganda. It's a hard question. But there's some notable examples of country enacted laws that targeted tech facilitated gender based violence.
There's no legal framework that's perfect and universally that's comprehensive. But some countries have really made meaningful strides, especially in the legislation. Maybe Tina Power could talk about the South African one that was done the cybercrime act of 2020. And some key provisions especially around the criminalizing communication, including those intended to cause mental, psychological and also emotional harm.
As far as I know, they have implemented strategy of also doing partnership with women's rights organization. And also to disseminate information and also the question of the cybercrime apps and also the African polices. So maybe dimension Tina Power can explore more on that. And some countries like Australia that have the online safety act of 2021 that focus really on targeting tech facilitated gender based violence, including image based abuse. Cyber bullying and also serious online harassment.
From conversation, they have also ‑‑
>> Sorry, Sandra, we are out of time. If you can just quickly close, that would be fantastic. Sorry.
>> SANDRA ACENG: Yeah. So those they have the safety commissioner that also is very important. And also some of the examples that I know Dr. Wakai [sounds like] knows about in Kenya. But explicitly we don't have policies that you might be talking about tech facilitated gender based violence. And but things that are related and thank you and over to you.
>> OTTAVIA GALUZZI: And thanks a lot. We don't have time for this but you can come to us to share any comments or questions that you might have. Apologies for running out of time. But yeah, I would really like to thank all the speakers, Tina, Michael, and Sandra, for your fantastic contribution. Thanks also to my colleague Odhran who was up late to follow us. Please come to us with any comments or questions, thank you for your time.
(applause)
